Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswathi

Adhyatma Prakasha KaryaJaya
Holetuusipur - 573 211

~ . q


Books You Ought To Read
Salient Features of Satikara's Vedanta
Although many books are very popular probably because their authorship has been ascribed to the great Sankara, they contain tenets in conflict with one another and the various doctrines contained in the three groups of works collectively called the 'Prasthana Trayi', indisputably ascribed to Sankara, As it is not easy for beginners to consolidate and discriminate for themselves the genuine Vedantic doctrines, an attempt is made by the Swamiji to solve this problem. Pages : 110

Intuition of Reality
Another masterpiece from the pen of Shri Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati, who has very ably illustrated as to_ how the Vedantic Knowledge is not mere subtle intellectualism, but it is an 'Intuition' of the Ultimate Reality arising through Divine Grace. The writer has incidentally refuted the oft-repeated assertion that Sankara's philosophy is an out-and-out rationalistic system and that he has provided no place for Iswara in his Advaita Philosophy. Pages : 105

SaDkara's Clarification of Certain Vedantic Concepts
The Upanishads contain two sets of teaching regarding Brahman or Reality, addressed to two different levels of the mind. To the highest grade of the aspirants belongs the disciple who has attained the mental equipment necessary for entering upon the course of study, either in this birth or who possesses an introvert mind as a result of disciplines undergone in his previous lives - qualifying him to grasp the teaching imparted in the Sruti, This class of seekers comprises two grades. The first needs only reminding of the true nature of one's Self by the Sruti through an experienced adept who has himself experienced the truths of Vedanta, while the second requires guidance for the contemplation of the spiritual steps through which one has ultimately to reach that same S•. II IS tn this class of both the .'lf. grades that this book is expected to be of some assistance in the study of Vedanta. Pages : 90

Adhyatma Granthavali


Serial No. 162

Publishers :

Adhyatma Prakasha KaryaJaya
Holeaersipur - 573 211


Stn.21 Ph.P. Narasappa Holenarsipur November. 1973 Cbsirmaa. A. 3rd Block Thyagarajanagar. The publication has been financed by the branch of Karyalaya out of the contributions from generous friends . 6th Main. Bangalore .. which was out of stock.: 3321182/3329280 Second Edition Printed by: As there was an increasing demand for tins enlightening work of Swamiji. Maruthi Extension" Bangalore .1998 SRI GANESHAMARUTHI PRINTERS # 76. Thandaveshwar Ciuuanun.12.P. Malleswaram Rly. we learn from the secretary. who. Graphics 1752/3. "Akshaya Mansion" Opp.First Edition Second Edition 1000 Copies 1000 Copies (1973) (1998) Publishers' Note (First Edition) We feel overjoyed in being able to announce the publication of this comprehensive work on Sankara's views on the Advaita Vedanta. We had temporarily to postpone the publication of 'The Updanishadic Approacy to Reality' which had been entrusted to us earlier. we have pleasure in bringing out this edition. Ksrysleyu Executive Committee (C) All Rights Reserved by The Adhyatma Prakasha Karyalaya. A.28 Phone : 62 85 42 A. Y. Holenarsipur (Registered under the Copy Right Act of 1957) Typeset by : LM. Holenarsipur 10. for fear that the author may not be able to finish this last work that emerged from his pen owing to the unexpectedly rapid approach of cataract which came in the way of the indefatigable zeal with which his entire life has been dedicated to the task of restoring Sankara's teachings on their pristine purity freed from all later encrustations in the shape of misinterpretations by recent writers. Ksryslsy« . prefer to remain incognito.

naturally contains my personal views as a sample of what is expected from the contributors to the forthcoming symposium. Sankara's works are now generally studied and taught by learned Pandits who are mostly guided by popular Sanskrit works relying on one or more of the conflicting sub-commentaries claiming to propound Sankara's thought. Sanskrit and English. And in the second place. by publishing several pamphlets and books as well as a few elaborate works in Kannada.the important topics in a neat and compact brochure for the ready reference of the critical scholars. have reason to be bewildered in their attempt to ascertain his exact teaching about the message of the Upanishads to seekers of the Highest Good universally believed by orthodox followers of the Sanatana Dhsrms. (2) Quotations from the Gita-Bhashya or any other commentary. I hope that the Table of contents and the Word-Index will be of some service to the reader in this direction. whose classical work is still available for reference.PREFACE Earnest students of Sri Sankaracharya's Advaita system. to have been promised by those sacred revelations to man. 24-10-1973 Author . (1) I have taken the Siitra Bhashya as the chief court of appeal for the obvious reason that it is an exegetical work which comprehends not only Sankara's considered conclusions and lays down the principles by which an interpretation of Advaita. Owing to my rapidly failing health and eyesight. Bangalore. neither the professors nor the oriental scholars. who undertake to write on the subject in English. Sri Gaudapadacharya. nor because of the paucity of explanatory literature on the subject. might have been developed and presented as an independent work by itself. independent of the commentaries on the other. and have produced my vouchers mainly in the form of citations from the Siitra-Bhashya.may be consolidated in the symposium proposed to be published by the Karyalaya The booklet now presented to Vedantins for critical appreciation.Vedanta. (3) I have tried to classify the important misconceptions under particular heads. so that all the assessments of my humble OpInIOnS. before arriving at any conclusion about the genuine views of that Acharya. are drawn upon only to confirm any conclusion based upon the StrtraBhashya. This is so neither because of the obscurity of style or the absence of precision of thought expressed in the writings of Sankara himself. but also because it convincingly shows the critical qualified seeker how the truth of Advaita Vedanta may be intuited as corresponding to the real nature of the Self of each one of us. there are two fertile sources of this confusion. I have attempted to invite the attention of scholars in general and the Vidwans of our country in particular. has to be guided. But my object was only to list all . And lastly (4) I have tried to show how Sankara's teachings can be corroborated by the declarations of the only traditional teacher. to the urgency of such a study. I am fully aware that many an item of discussion noticed here. In the first place. On the contrary. I have now thought it fit to condense my views within the limited compass of this small book appealing to the thoughtful Vedantins of our country to consider how far my conclusions are acceptable and to offer their candid opinion in this matter. seem to be earnest in entering upon a comparative study of the varying' estimates of Sankara presented by the sub-commentaries and the adverse critics of (Sankara) belonging to other schools on the one hand. and in the original works of Sankara.

the so-called Sakti of Isvara (21) _ Mistaken for the avidya-sakti by Post Sankaras (21). 19 21 12 13. Gaudapada and BaciaraYaJ)a 15 The unjustifiable theory put forward by certain critics assigning lower rank to . 1 J. 23 16. Avidya and Maya Not Synonymous (9). 9. 3. The Comprehensive Signification of the word 'Atmaikarva.The Potential seed of the world. 1. 3 7 9 17 4. The Usefulness of the Distinction of the Two Views Seeming self-contradictions in the Bhashya are all dissolved and adverse criticisms lose all their force when one reminds himself of the distinction of Paramarthic and Vyavaharic views (16). 18 10 12. 2. Omniscience of Brahman Omniscience and omnipotence refer to the intrinsic nature of Brahman (12). The words Advaita and Advaya A baseless imputation levelled against Gaudapada in connection with the signification of the two words (18).Absolute unity of Atman is what is meant (17). with Brahman 14. 13 The Real and the unreal from the two view-points Parinama or Transformation of Brahman into the Universe (21) . The Distinctive Feature of Sruti-Pramana Sruti concerning the nature of Brahman is the Ultimate Pramiil}a in as much as it sublates all convention of Pramana and Prameya including the sruti-prarnana after the dawn of the intuition of Brahman (15). Cause and Effect Vedantic view of the relation between cause and effect contrasted with the views of the S'imkhyas (13). Empirical Reality of the Universe The Universe is not an illusion . The Identity of the Jiva What it implies (19). Brahman and Isvara Brahman as the cause of the universe (10) Brahman as the Ruler (Isvara) of individual selves (11). Name Sankara's Mission III Page 1 Life (Paras 1~6) 10. 15. 6. 22 8. 7. 5.CONTENTS No. The Essential Identity of the Universe 13 with Brahman Two examples to illustrate this (20).Distinction between the empirical and the transcendental view concerning Pramanas (14). Introduction The Unique Feature of Sruikara's Work Adhyasa (7) ~ Sruti and Intuition (7) No hypothetical avidya-sakti (8).Vidya' The term does not denote merely the identity of Jiva and Isvara .

Disputes about Avidya-sakti 36 The locus and object of avidya . Vedic Vyavahara A vidya involved m all Vedantic Vyavahara and its two aspects (26). Various Views concerning Sleep (35). 26 17. 2 1.Sankara's text in the matter (29).Is Jiva like vision of Brahman limited by Upadhi or a reflection of Brahman in Upadhi ? (44) The Witness as many and one according to sub-commentaries (45) - . of A. 25. 30. Re-birth and Creation (33) Misconception concerning Deep Sleep (34). 22. Some Needless Disputations Avidya and Jivas regarding 48 50 52 32 in the interpretation 32. the State of 19. the Beginninglessness 43 44 45 Deep 46 III the 28 28. References to' the Method m Sankara's Work The maxim of the Arundhati Star Sutra-Bhashya (24).tman and Sailkara's Statements regarding the Potency of Distinctions m Sleep and Dissolution (37). In 26. Divergent Views about Avidya Trance (36).Badrayana in contrast with Gaudapada with regard to causality (22). Misconception ness (31).About the number of avidyas . 20. The cause of Waking. 31 31. The Method of Superimposition Rescission the method (23). 29. 34. and 24. 34 23 . Misconception about of Sarnsara (32). Why this Method IS adopted by the 30 Vedantas Reference to the method by some ancient Vedantins in Gita Bhashya (25). An unexpected of Adhyasa turn The compound word mitl1yajiiananimittah twisted and misinterpreted to mean having for its natural cause (mithya) undefinable avidya-sakti. 33.Is jiva the object of me-notion (43) . Why no Pramana IS needed to prove Avidya or Atrnan (30). Misconception with regard to the identity of Jiva waking up from Sleep (38). 27. about Disembodied- 40 41 Both Gaudapada and Badarayana recognize 27 18. The Anology of Seed and Sprout as a Beginningless Series (39). Relative Priority of avidyas and Jivas (40) The Upadhi of Jiva in Dream and waking (41) Sleep and swoon (42) .The Gita-Bhashya in confumation of the Adhyasa views (28). 48 Fundamental Vyavahara Mutual superimposition not-Atrnan (27).

The Importance of the discussion Isvara and Jiva (58). 55. The Creatorship of Isvara and the Transmigratory nature of Jiva (49). Kama (61) . 82 84 89 91 44. Means to Jfiana and Mukti (59). 39. 93 95 49. The Relation between Karma-kanda and Jfiana-kiinda (51). How Sankara's Vedanta happens to be misunderstood by other Vedantins (52). 43. 46. 97 102 Means to Knowledge 103 105 105 107 108 112 Whether Sravana etc. 64 50. ? (67).. 53. The Central Philosophy of Sailkara's Tradition of Vedanta (55). . 53 48. 41.Self-control and the means to 92 35. 47. 45. 54. Can Upasana do away with Avidya ?(53). IS no Upasana (65). 40. 36. Adhyatma-Yoga The Immediate Samadhi (66). Conclusion Word Index 80 57. Is a Combined Practice of all the three means absolutely necessary ? (68). 67 51. 52. The Legitimate Place of Karma and Upasana as means to Liberation knowledge (62). Criticism of the Doctrine of Combined Practice of Karma and Jiiana (60). How does Jnana destroy Avidya ? (54).Controversy about the number of Jivas (46) Prajna in sleep misinterpreted as mostly ignorant (47). about Are Panditya and other means the same as Sravana Etc. Why does Badarayana take pains to reconcile Srutis teaching creation ? (57). Adhyatma-Yoga (64). 68 70 73 75 76 56. How the Majority of Vedantic Schools happened to rruss the Importance of Jfiana-Texts (56). and Ether Moksha In the case of the Meditator and of the Jiianin (63). SaiIkara ' s Verdict as regards the means of Knowledge (69). Needless Controversy over the Syntactical Relation of the words In the Text "I'at-tvam-asi' Two opposed views Biidhii-Samiiniidhik8fE11JYa and Primary SamiiniidhikaralJya (48). The Anology of the Pot-Ether III General Gaudapada strictly Battered (50). 42. are enjoined for 38. 37.

ll. -. Introduction to Siitra Bhashya lSavasyopanishad Aitareyopanishad Kathakopanishad Kenopanishad Bhagavadgita Gaudapada's Karikas on Mandukya Chanda gyapanishad Tai ttiri yopanishad Taittirlya Ara1)yaka Para number of Sankara Bhashya as in the Karyalaya Publication. both in India and abroad. Except for some poetical or half-poetical legendary works called SaIikara. any assessment of his Vedantic System. there are no reliable historical accounts of his life or the reforms he effected in society. P. Ke. Ma. Bhamathi m. Thus G-Glta. Svetasvataropanishad Vediinta-Siitras . That he was the founder of the Advaitic System of Vedanta.. GK. -n. ~. aTI. 1ft. e. c. CflT.. B. that he resuscitated some religious sects and placed them on a firm footing. with regard to the biography. qiT. TaL TaL AI.ABBREVIATIONS N. Pro Br.§O§ ------- m. in. and that he established four different mutts in the four cardinal directions of India with the object of propagating tr. Ka. . Even the place and date of his birth or exit. Sve. Intro Isa Ai. Mu . have not been definitely ascertained till to-day. ~.ft. Prasnopanishad Brhadaral)yakap ani shad The Sub-commentary By Vachaspati Misra on SutraBhashya of Sankara ManQukyopanishad M undakopanishad Vedanta-Siitras of Badarayana Sankara's Bhashya on INTRODUCTION There are a number of misconceptions that have gained currency. li. VS." ~.The name of each Upanishad or other work has been contracted into the initial letter or letters and the Bhashya thereon has been indicated by the symbol 'Bh'. written or caused to be written by authors biased towards their own peculiar doctrines or religious practices. unless these misconce-ptions are first removed from the public mind by a consensus of opinion of Vedanta-vidwans and scholars interested in the teachings of the Upanishads. is bound to lose much of its value. . G. And in my humble opinion. ff. Ch. GBh-Gita Bbiishy»: 31u:rT.Vijsyes. long after the departure of the Acharya. 'tff. MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA ------. SBh. mission in life and the lasting work wrought by the great Sankaracharya of world-wide fame. his parentage and the chief incidents in his life. lit. ~.

should be able to see the Truth immediately without any other extraneous assistance from this Sruti-Prasthiina alone. It is in this branch of Vedantic study. But for those who are not up to the mark. Vj e shall therefore restrict ourselves chiefly to this Acharya's Bhashya on the Vedantic-Siltras in determining his genuine traditional teaching for the purpose of exposing the various misconceptions rampant among modem interpretations. the Bhagavadgita and the Vedanta-Sutras of BadarayaI).his best not only in making the original source qurte intelligible by reducing them to a systematic whole. 2. about thirteen in number.a. Of these three Institutes of Vedanta collectively known by the name of the PrasthanatraYl: the canonical Upanishads. One who is of the highest type of qualified aspirants. Seekers of the middling type. but also by showing the unique indubitable nature o~ ed~ntic Vision of Atman according to his own tradition m contrast to all other systematizations conceivable. which has been called the Nyiiya Prssthiine. In these circum. have to master BadarayaQ. That work not only explains the Vedantic teaching concerning Brahman or Atman compendiously.2 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA sANKARA's MISSION IN LIFE 3 Vedanta. but also sets forth at length. who is beheved to have inspired him with any such mission. And thirdly. which perhaps may be guessed to have been a reference to his direct preceptor we ha~e no mention of Govinda-Bhagavatpada. MISSION IN LIFE I. as exclusively revealing the nature of Brahman or Reality. therefore.stances. the study of the Bhagvadgita or the SI1lJti-Prasthiina is also necessary. is nowhere vouched for in the acc:redited classical works of that Acharya. . SANKARA'S . are some of the prevalent popular beliefs which are yet to be corroborated by indisputable historical evidence. especially in the three classical works in the shape of Bhashyas on the Upanishads. it would appear to be best for us to rest content with believing that Sankara still lives in his Vedantic works. The belief that Advaita is just one school . That Sankara was commissioned by his Guru to write a Bhashya on Advaita to counteract other sectarian views. y . But for a sohtary verse at the end of the commentary on Gaudapada's Karikas. where Sankara is at . aimed at in Vedanta. the needful course of discipline (Siidhana) besides the central teaching (Siddhanta).a's Siiriraka MlmiiIpsii also. that which recommends the method o~ approa~h adopted in the investigation of Reality With the aid of Manana (reflection on the significance of the Upanishadic teaching) or Vedantic Reason. have to supplement the study of the teaching of the Upanishads by undergoing this course before they are able to see Reality with the direct insight. the qualified students of the last class. form the basic source which Sankara has recognized.

as some non-advaitic Vedantins have styled him. Yamunacharya and Ramanuja who have cited certain names of ancient Vedantins. On the other hand.ti dialectic (the logic of the inapplicability of the four possible alternative predicates to the Absolute). He is mayically 'I< The Mal. can be readily known through his express reference to Gaudapada as 'one who knows the traditional way of interpreting the Vedantas or Upanishads'.4 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA SANKARA'S MISSION IN LIFE 5 of Vedanta which has always been current side by side with the Dvaita of Madhvacharya. Sankara and Gaudapada. While the Bhashyas of Sankara do refer to the Sankhyas. cannot be substantiated. has been demonstrated on the strength of available evidence. that the pre-Sankara. borrowed verses verbatim or adapted them from Buddhistic works and has taken over doctrines like non-origination and the Chatushk6. which emphatically declare 3"I"I11I41. published by the Karyalaya. as we have no significant extracts from those writers relied upon by the hostile 4. have been both charged with having deliberately imported Buddhistic doctrines into Vedanta by adverse Bhashyakaras. Vaiseshikas and other dualistic Darsanas opposed to Vedanta. 2-1-9). That Sankara was not the founder of this particular traditional interpretation of Vedanta. 1-4-14).fJ ~m f<=l"lllJd 'Being never born. ~ itG:Rr«>l~llOlrC{Fot::{[ill~: (SBh. formulated on the flimsy evidence of certain recent Vedantic writers like Bhaskara. and there have been oriental scholars who have tried to show how Gaudapada has actually adopted words which have significant meaning only in Buddhistic philosophy. Yfigas. to indicate that Vedantic schools like the modern Dvaita or Visishtadvaita Vedanta. is the result of a hasty conjecture. That all this. cntics. we have several Advaitic schools mentioned by both Sankara in his SiitmBhiishya and Suresvara in his Sambandha. whose interpretation he has been at considerable pains to refute in his Bhashyas. is easily disposed of by' the consideration of the fact.Viirtika _ whose views have been stated and criticized at length from the rational as well as exegetical stand-point. And some scholars have gone to the length of supposing that Gaudapada was himself a hidden Buddhist. The theory . in . 5.Vedanta was more akin to Ramanuja's System. tfilT 'if BIlGI4FqcO crcRt (SBh. existed at the time of or before Sankara. * and the English Introduction to it. my Sanskrit commentary on the Mandilkya. The foundation of Gaudapada's ajiitJ'-viida no less than that of Sankara (the doctrine of the unborn Brahman) is in the Upanishads themselves.1Qiikya-Rahasya-Vivrti. 3. and the Visishtadvaita of Ramanujacharya. there is not a single hint either in Sankara' s works or in those of any contemporaneous writers. that Sankara himself refers to numerous Advaitic schools.

4-99). Sankara' s Bhashya proclaims that Vedanta was being misinterpreted by many Vrittiksrss. 3-18). and it has been shown there that.K. and ascribed by Sankara to 'knowers of Vedantic tradition' (SBh. Gaudapada insists that there is the Revered Lord or Absolute untouched by all the four alternatives (O. for quite unlike other commentators on the Vedanta Sutras.K. It is not right to regard Sankara's as only one more school to offer its own system brought out of the Upanishads by means of the artifice of certain peculiar ways of interpretation. ?J M!<l{JSj'l1ClIGlJ¥i':I ~!iiClFB(i 5'I.otherwise called Avidyiiwithout postulating any theory or acceptance of Prenuiass (the valid sources of right knowledge). It is a conjecture unsupported by any historical evidence. 21-9).K.-:j!OIl{ . otherwise known as Vedantas. 4-81) repeatedly occuring in Gaudapada's Karikas. As for the Dialectic of four alternatives. for there is not a shred of evidence to show that the Buddhistic philosophers relied on the examination of the three states of consciousness. Even in Gaudapada's work. the conflicting views of the Buddhists have been relegated to the very last chapter. was to counteract the influence on peoples' mind. The phrase 3l"1yf<1C. and appeals to universal' intuition throughout.•• 6 MISCONCEPTIONS III ABOUT SANKARA THE UNIQUE FEATURE OF SAN'KARA'S WORK 7 many ways' (Tai. 3-36. by the Buddha (~~ OF ~ THE UNIQUE FEATURE SANKARA'S WORK 7.. The student of Sankara' s procedure in interpreting the Upanishads would do well to bear in mind the following axiomatic truth which he puts forward about the validity of the Upanishadic teaching. 4-84). . is a clincher on this point.fflfljrFIOfCl '(!{"4r~q ~ 1flil1'f iI~f"1~ f'li"lI""'lt+=L fc6" ~ . with an Introduction dealing with Adhyiisa . Sailkara begins his Bhashya. is to reveal the wisdom which finally sublates this avidya or nescience. 31j'l1ClIClflHcql er. 6. Ar. are due to this natural tendency of the human mind. of the prevailing Buddhism. 1-16. to support the doctrine that Reality is non-dual. and that his commentaries were intended to restore the traditional way of interpretation. to suppose that Sankara's or even Gaudapada's chief aim. ~ ~4F"1*. After conclusively showing how all evils of mundane life. he claims that the main purport of the Upanishads.:Y~CJ'{ (G. while some of the Buddhistic speculations come into line with Vedantic reason the doctrine of non-dual intuition of Alman was never born referred to G. the reader should carefully note that while the dialectic aims at showing the impossibility of Causation. unborn and free from the sleep of ignorance (snidrsm) and devoid of the dream of misconception (asvapnam). just like any other school ancient or modern .

A Sanskrit book called the Peiichepiidiks-Presthiinem has been 9. but Sruti etc.that the beginningless mutual superimposition of the real Atman and the unreal not-self. constituting the seed of . "". )('60. (religious duty).IQWJ 'qT. which gives rise to all the different phenomena. and intuition and other accessories also. while Maya is the name given to Prskrti or name and form in seed form.1~l. but which are undefinable as identical with or other than (isvara). has accepted this maxim in his interpretation of the Upanishadic texts.8 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA AVIDYAANDMAYA 9 •'Sruti and the other JlOly works. It is not right to say that Sankara postulates a hypothetical avidya (a.1l1~q i. has been superimposed on Atman or the Self.as we have already seen (para 7) .:qtill- 414 ti fllUI qaq lift \ij~ ~ ~. published by the present writer vshowing how the non-discrimination of the new doctrines contained in this book from the genuine doctrines. ~t:1lfcteJ(Cftf?ld (""14#1f4 II ~. 8. is itself the beginningless Avidya or basic nescience which occasions all the conventions of human life. he maintains . are the means here according to the context. ~ vidya is subjective and has been explained by Sarikara as the natural tendency of the mind to superimpose the Self and the not-self on each other. fl4iilf?Ol 'a:lJl""lf1 4:q t~ am:q~ c. as some are tempted to explain it. lW1T. in the sub-commentaries (beginning with the Paiic]18piidika) on Sankara's Bhashya. have sprung up mostly owing to a signal failure to discriminate the original teaching and the doctrines foisted on it by the sub-commentators. as they are in the case of enquiry into the nature of DhamJ1J. This hypothetical svidyii. 28. and is responsible for the numerous conflicting interpretations now parading themselves in the garb of Sankara's Vedanta. with varying theories appended to it. Avidya and Maya are not synonymous terms in Sankara-Vedanta. AVIDYA AND MAYA No other commentator of Badarayana' s Sutras. Many of the adverse criticisms of Sailkara' s Advaita. The word 'snirvechemye" may have been perhaps responsible for the formulation of such a theory (see para 21 sequel). Nor has Maya been even treated as a statement of contradictions involved in our experience of the world and in our knowledge of it.. For the knowledge of Brahman. ~: . It is some post-Sankara's Vedantins who have treated Avidya and Maya to be identical (see para 21). has been a fruitful source of confusion concerning Sankara's Vedanta. 1-1-2.vidyii-sakti) which has transformed itself into egoity called ahankiira which in its tum." SBh. m:. fancied by avidya as though identical with the omniscient Isvara.~ ~ ~fdfltMl~f~ ~-~-~'l!> "Name and form. On the contrary. has been taught. are not the sole means of right knowledge in the enquiry into the nature of Brahman. has to culminate in intuition and relates to an existent entity.

and by nature eternally pure. see the author's Miintjukya-Rahasya. omnipotent. In consequence of this misconception they have invented a theory that knowers of Brahman. i§vara is conditioned by Maya ~name and form) conjured up by Avidya. conscious and free. and that Sankara's tradition has bodily imported the ajativiida of Buddhists. Brahman is described to be omniscient. many have surmised that this is a total rejection of all causality. Some iatapretcrs of SaIikara. That this doctrine is altogether foreign to Sankara Bhashya.G. when it is observed that From the where causality is rejected on rational grounds.* is. )! . takes place only after all the Jivas have thus attained this initial freedom.N AND tsvARA 11 the phenomenal world of mundane life. have been called the Maya. the one without a second' (SBh. sustenance and dissolution of the universe differentiated into name and form. 1-1-17) 11. become one with the qualified Brahman in the first instance. BRAHMAN AND ISV ARA 10. additional information on this subject.ij fi{"{l ~ "" I II tI e. * For concede the distinction of the Ruler and the ruled from the empirical standpoint. 2-1-14) to the same Reality which he has styled as 'Isvara' as also 'Psremesvsre' (SBh. Sakti and Prakiti of the omniscient Lord.~~ ) empirical standpoint. and that the final merging in the Absolute Brahman.\fH'ilfq :.10 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA BRAH!v1A. have been misled by the use of the word lsv~ which is also used to denote Seguns-Bmhmen (Brahman with qualities) to be meditated upon. i"I tfI o.Vivrti (Sanskrit) and the English Introduction to that work.K. ~ fu 1i"1<FIT ~' (' of what possible' . this causality simply means that the universe.~6filsfu:~: 'Omniscient. becomes crystal-clear. has no existence of its own apart from Brahman. contammg numerous agents and experiencers of the fruits of actions (SBh. whereas Jives (individual selves) are conditioned by . Brahman is the cause of the birth. however. 1-1-2).of Vedanta at the Vyavahiinka leveL Compare ~~' ('Is born through Maya' . the Lord of all. It is not right to think that this relative term Isvara (Ruler of the selves) applied to Brahman affects Its really real nature as the Absolute One without a second. cnr. From this point of view.G. 3-24). birth through Maya is Sankara uses the epithets ~: ~m:.3-27).r fCfl f. From the highest standpoint of Vedanta (ParamarthaDrsbti). in both the Smti and Srnrti" SBh. For Brahman is I§vara only when wt. being a superimposition on Brahman.-q bW qp:ffi "" (-m . From Slokas of Gaudapada like m qr -cmn cnftr :. who rules over all the Jivas or individual selves. 440. 2-1-14. the Self of all. Brahmarf is lsvara the Lord. flqJ.K.r F4i f. But the fact is that Gaudapada himself accepts the Maya-Satkaryavuds .

independent of Brahman the cause. and 2-1-14).12 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA EMPIRICAL REALITY OF THE UNIVERSE 13 the associates of the aggregates of the body and the organs. OMNISCIENCE OF BRAHMAN 13. EMPIRICAL REALITY OF THE UNIVERSE 14.. It would not be an accurate deduction from the above-cited 'excerpt. ~.. since both of them are experienced together. r can never be alienated from Brahman. in the Atman who is of the intrinsic nature altogether devoid of all conditioning associates when they are sublated by wisdom" SB.0Glq~ 'q l~ II ~ ~~."\ir'F141e:~ fqCf4rq~Hljl: II ~ 'qT.:F-aqcf<t fu "ff~~ ~. The Vijnanavadin says that the object is identical with the idea. It may.iI'!flf. ~-~-~~. But consciousness or the knowing nature itself . SBh.1. are only relative to the limitation due to the conditioning associates called up by A vidya. is not omniscient". -. is the intrinsic nature of Reality. 1-1-5.imC4ijcf~C€tlfl!Ooq6j6j{: It goes without saying that this argument might be extended to omnipotence also with equal force . ms~: ~ "It is a self-contradiction to hold that He who has eternal knowledge capable of throwing light on evertything. is the same as the kindred doctrine of the Sankhyas. has its own criterion for testing reality and unreality. ~hereas from the Paramarthika standpoint there can be neither Isvara-nature nor the convention of omniscience etc. It is the Buddhists who deny reality to external objects.fllqlftIqfl. for while Brahman cannot be supposed to possess a power by virtue of which it can create the world.n:f "#fR f'i ("414R8. It is not right to think that Badarayal). 2-1-14. the effect of name and form so conjured up : ~ Oirc(€lktli. . Brahman may not be the knower of all from the Paramarthic standpoint.~. Sankara says this in so many words in the following statement :<RZr ~ tlCffcjt!llj Iq 'iffiRe. and al.r 111: ~~'lO!ClqrCl<h ~ ~ ~ 12. 'qT. is in itself unreal. and has no existence. The universe is not an illusion according to Badararayana as explained by Sankara. ~ ~o. Since the independent existence of the outside object.:. 2-1-7. But Sankara draws our attention to the principle ~'1IUIIl~flIll. however.a's doctrine of the identity of the effect with the cause.) such. to think that omniscience of Brahman is wholly a figment of avidya. (Otcf#ftti. (tl?! q<. is inconceivable. ommscience.~l). CAUSE AND EFFECT "Thus lsvara's lsvara-naturc. Vyiivahiira (human procedure in C0111)nOnlife). that it is the idea within alone that appears as though it were outside. {'1cf~lfmtti i ". 440. and omnipotence. inasmuch as there is really nothing else to be known. he concludes.f 1Rmmff 'fernr:rr dqqEl~ 0i4IWBq1qtf~ ~r. (Vide the Bhashya On VS. be of the very essence of that power.". 1-4-14. 69. For he stoutly declares that the effect or the universe of sentient and insentient things.

(SBh. the Upanishads chiefly deal with transcendental truths beyond the ken of all empirical Pramanas like sensuous perception. For. Therefore. ~ j{'81if£! "'q . !OI410I!Ol'f~"!Ogl~·d)1 II "It is on the evidence be noted that from the really (Piiramarthic)standpoint of Vedanta.Intro. and not vice versa".flP. disregarding one's own nature of identity with Brahmatman. p. deny the validity of Pramanas in the empirical field. even while he does aver that they can never survive to function after the knowledge of the unity of Atman.:r {"lfql("~Cfirq~ft1qFtI:." .14 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA THE DISTINCTIVEFEATUREOF SRUTI~PRA~A 15 or want of evidence of some valid means of knowledge. 2-2-28).<:fl!/iI 'mCl ~.OI>l~l(Cficlc1~ (f FClChf{tl 3{'F1et:4i1iFJ.f "'q 'Wm. .in contrast with empirical 15. ~ II m.A Ch'8'lF-q~F(jElH "" ~ ~f£!fqtll(1 3"l1\ql\'"fl~'1 ~ ~ I~ 14 11 ¢lt9I("lidl '§. the notion of unreality regarding the valid means and objects of knowledge as well as that of the resultant knowledge. SBh. to treat all Vedantic Vyavahara to be on a par with texts dealing with Karma and Upasana. 6).. 436. This is just like the idea of certainty about the perception striking to a common man. mcrcr. ~-~-r~. or teaching Moksha. that we have to determine the concei vability or the inconceivability of the existence of a thing. never occurs to anyone. 5.L{1fl{ I fqCfiI{I~CI ~ laW. who sees things of various grades of existence in a dream before waking. Every living soul looks upon the effects themselves as 'me and mine'related to one another as one's own Self and something belonging to oneself. ~ ". but never suspects at the time that it might be only a semblance of perception" SBh. THE DISTINCTIVE FEATURE SRUTI-PRAMA~A OF Sankara does not. "It is on the presupposition of the superimposition of the Atman and the un-atman called 'avidya' that aU conventions of Pramanas and Prameyas (means and objects of knowledge) and all the Sastras-whether injunctive and prohibitive. '6~G. ~ ClICj'gH: i ~~ IOlI$d'8'l ~ m <qqfu ~ ~ ~ diiillClill1. Vediintic procedure in teaching the true nature of Brahman . It would not be proper or fair. It will real ~ 3i1("4Hlrq. It is evident that vyavahara which is restricted to external phenomena. as we have already seen (para 7. 61fClElI@l{. the distinctive feature of Sankara's traditional ~ it -. however. Only. and to rest content with quoting some Upanishadic text even in the case of texts which purport to determine the real nature of Atman.no less than that of enjoining Upiisanfj~is also entirely within the region of Vedic Vyavahiira. f1 f¥ildil Cj >rflf~ ~~ 1liITlffiL <qqfu. function. \OI14. 2-1-14.ci{cHI~ ~:. !'lqIOI!Ol~qO!OjcH?l<1 ffifCfi2fi1 ~rGI:hI!/:q '¥1I~[fu[ "So long as there has not been the knowledge of the unity of the real Ahnan. lfll' ~~: !>IF(lci(l IOlHtqtld ~~ ~&ll\t:ldi ctlfCfiChI ~rC. however. every secular and Vedic procedure is consistent till awakening to one's identity with Brahman.

the repugnant conclusion would follow that even the Sruti could cease to be ! (Reply :-) Not so. what could one understand and With what? . Atman alone for the knowing one. ~-~-~. what could one say and with what. there... what could one reflect upon and with what. 4-5-15. but because they appeal to certain partial intuitions by coordinating which the inquirer lands himself at the final universal intuition of Atman which transcends all Vyavahara including that of Sruti-pramiiJ. there.1ya (yalidity of Sruti) as a means of right knowledge." SBh. what could one see and with what l' points out how (Pramanas) like perception cease to exist when enlightenment dawns. This distinction of absolute Reality and Vyavahara from the standpoint of empirical life. ~ cfl~~~~*~~*~~ ~ ~ B4141. there. ~-~-~~) $fdCl't:l'iIC'l_ ~ 'lTI. what could one smell and with what. Besides this text which negates all Pramanas and their function in peneral terms.~EiI~ ~ *~ ~ *~ ~ "The text beginning with where all has become. there is a specific passage which Sankara quotes as particularly proclaiming that the :' edas become no Vedas on the plane of the unity of Atman : .. is that Sruti texts are. what could one touch a~d with what. should be unfailingly borne in mind in order to reconcile the several seeming self-contradictory statements in Sankara-Bhashya.. $f1q~R4 (<i!. Q\cllf14lf'l1: ~~: ~ ~it II u. what could one see and with what. not Pramana merely on the score of their being Srnti texts. however. Sankara repeatedly quotes the following text as a voucher for this' * _~ I ~8:Tm~ (<i!. 4-1-3. there. (Objection :-) If there are no perception arid other Pramanas.. " Br. 510 "Where. THE USEFULNESS OF THE DISTINCTION OF THE TWO VIEWS 16.te\"€llC{I'm '~~:' ftRrrsfcrc:rr~' C.. ~-t. there.. transmigration.16 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA. gradation in Moksha. there. there.-r~) ~~- ~C'41f~11 fu ~: ~-~~) ~ ~it ~ ~~'qTCf ~~fl\fd . (To explain:-) For on the strength of the text which begins with 'Here the father becomes no father' and says "Vedas become no Vedas" we do accept even the non-existence of Sruti when enlightenment dawns. Apparent contradictions with regard to fructifying (Priiriibdha) karmas. the three states of consciousness. all has become Atman alone for this knower.~o. For it is desirable.. what cou1d one listen to and with what. there. Cft ~ DISTINCTION OF THE TWO VIEWS tlcf14I\~ql~ ~ 17 interpretation. the distinction of the Human procedure of using Pramanas to know or deal with objects of knowledge. has been abs~utely denied in this text for one who has intuited Atman as the One without a second. the state of beginninglessness of Samsara. Upasanas.. what could one taste and with what. 1. $. ~t. there.

and Advaya has been supposed by them to be a Buddhistic term borrowed and incorporated with Vedanta by Gaudapada.~~C(lO[l€luqlr~<. ..oq1' . Brahmatman.. '~t?l~~~ '3i1r~~~~' "'IHlfBi f&. in accordance with the Sruti 'l!Oi:fI~curfidlljt( (Ch. experienced.. and Brahman are said to teach • the unity of Atman ' (Atmaikatva)] (~) '~~ (W. Atmaikatva-Vidya or the wisdom of the Absolute Reality. Ignoring this distinction.q ~' Rq~fCOt ~1{[1f'"llj1:t. That this is incorrect. has been sometimes misinterpreted to mean the identity of Brahman and the individual Atman and the prstipstti (intuition) of this ekatva (or identity) has been taken to mean immediate experience (Siikshatkiira) to be attained through Nididhyiisana or a sort of "Bhavana' (or creative imagination) in accordance with Sravapa (study of Vedarrtic texts) and manana. has been mainly responsible for the imputation of incorrect views to Sankara and the unjustifiable criticisms of this school of Vedanta by adverse critics.[FdqlG01q{ Qoq1\i11dl{ [Here the texts containing the words Arman.1fli~ 19 Higher and the Lower Brahman and other doctrines with which the Sutra-Bhashya is teemed with.1~ ~.f)('q!. ~GOH'ClICfllHi ~€Hr4Iqljfd~'41\ij'"iHi ('11«tqul '8ti~dHi 3i·~i{Ullf1l Cfllllf'"i~~~i ~ ~~lrqf-i '" q4q+lH1hbU '" " II [Here the words. The Vedantas are declared to have the only purport of teaching Brahmatman]. Sankara and Suresvara have uniformly used the term advaita to mean one without a second. The word advaita.18 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA (~) THE WORDS ADVAITA AND ADVAYA 3ilf~~I~ICl I 'QdGlrD. is based. and Brahman synonymously :- trcf ~ 1 ~ 31rftIT d ttlJOIffi 1 ~d41C1j' '~ 'R trcf ~Gllqlrql'. is readily seen by observing that Sankara frequently uses the words Atman. That there is no foundation ~or this theory. SBh. 1-1-5-64 . is seen from the fact that Gaudapada.] THE WORDS ADVAITA AND ADVAYA 18. THE COMPREHENSIVE SIGNIFICATION OF THE WORD 'ATMAIKATVA-VIDYA' 17. ito. 6-2-1) "One without a second'. has been restricted by some scholars to mean the identity of Jiva and ·Isvara. Brahmannan. is declared to be taught as being of the nature of One Brahman. and Brahman are used synonymously. [Here the triple distinction of the experiencer. Here is a statement of Sankara from the Sutra-Bhashya : (~) ~ ctJ'C«!.:no *-~-~*. and the Ruler. ~-~ i) ~~i:fIfCl~~ Mtmt ~ fltI«1\'4 II -:q lRCIT ~ fl nrfcltf ~ . are all resolved when one reminds oneself with the principle on which this important distinction of the two standpoints.

While it is true that at the vyavaharic level where Brahmajfiana is taught. the subject and the object. and on the basis of this misconception. (OK. and ~fld"H1~q~ tftr. Higher and Lower. and has devoted one whole chapter entitled 'Adveits-Pmksrsoe' for this purpose. and 'advaya' in their primary sense in this very chapter. justifies this distinction. and '~Tf&<ntmf111: ~<fm: I ~Tf"[ll1tmf I' (OK. The reader will note that the 'Advaita' Sruti is invoked here to support. and there is no question of the non-difference between Jiva and Brahman). where the distinction of two entities. The doctrine that Paramatman (real Atman) should be recognised as Jiva's own Self. for instance. He is also careful to use the words 'advaita'. Gaudapada similarly writes '~14P=tI31f1ie: ad1iad ~: "This duality is only mayic. There is absolutely no justification for the view of those that insist that the word 'Advaya' necessarily implies something exclusively epistemic whereas advaita is ontologicaL Neither the derivation of the words nor usage of authoritative writers. misconceived as meaning the recognition of the identity of the individual self with Brahman or the Absolute. II Here Sankara is justifying the advaitic teaching that Brahman is of two kinds. Compare. for It is actually Truth and Reality in one and therefore It is both advaitam and advayam in the primary sense of those words. '~1WIT~ fu ta w~' (OK. Brahman has to be regarded as ontic and Its knowledge as epistemic. The critical reader will do well to note that Gaudapada prefers the use of the term 'advaita' whenever he wants to draw the readers attention to the nature of Reality. but only the absolute unity of Brahman or Atman. . is denied. is not nullified by this division of Brahman according to Sankara. The Sruti which emphatically says that Brahman is without a second. the ultimate Intuition of Brahman is neither ontological nor epistemological. The word 'Advaya' primarily means 'not consisting of two constituents'.viida). the only Reality being non-dual' (OK. because the second or Lower Brahman is only Brahman with the conditioning associates conjured up by avidya. 3-18). 3-30).:raT ~ (OK. 1-17). Sankara has been charged by some orthodox critics with the heresy of preaching the identity of the puny Jiva and the omniscient and onmipotent Isvara. 3-18). 3-17) where ' advaita' (non-duality) is contrasted with 'dvaita' (duality. um:m ~:' THE IDENTITY OF THE JIV A WITH BRAHMAN 19. not the identity of Jiva and Isvara.IT RfT.20 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA '1~cP""l ~fd{lq'(ltirn ~ I "1' I ('f~ THE IDENTITY OF THE Jiv A WITH BRAHMAN 21 qft&d~i1. as well as with the blasphemy of imputing delusion to Brahman (Bhriinte-Bmhme. ~as been sometimes.

" empirical standpoint." SBh. 4-1~3-510. it should be understood that all this universe of manifold things such as the experienced and the experiencers.a interpreted Sankara. does not exist apart from Brahman. he has clarified his position thus :. ~~o. but only that it is intended . is false. Vedanta recognises that the criterion for the reality of Atman or Brahman is not the same as that for the reality of empirical objects. Here the experiencing selves are illustrated by pot-ethers and experienced things are compared to mirage-water.. Sankara illustrates this by citing empirical examples thus : ~. 2-1-14. THE REAL AND THE UNREAL THE TWO VIEW-POINTS FROM 21. VS.. ~. As for the alleged blasphemy. are not distinct from ether in the general.tjt0=4 i>lfij I'Eld Q ~v. and just as mirage-water etc.• are not distinct from a sandy desert etc.-qm'if ~- 'ill~rwF. From this it has to be concluded that God's characteristics such as being free from sins are real and unaffected.. while the opposite nature of the other.fi I~IH rll cq 9_. has anticipated all such hypercriticisms by pointing out that BadarayaQ. <mT f.'f. .:j .22 MlSCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA THE REAL AND THE UNREAL 23 Sankara.'f'e:Ch 'i Iq_ & 'Hlf~~s I ~1 0lljql@llcqlit. 1-4-26) :- .. is the only absolute truth according to Srutis as shown by Badarayat}. (Brahman is the material cause also of the universe because it is taught that It modified itself as the universe. even while the distinction of sentient non-sentient nature remains quite real from (or the by and the "Therefore.a himself has recommended the contemplation on the mutual identity of Jlva and ISvara in their transcendental aspect on the strength of Aitareya and Jabiila texts (VS. ~ +:4 (€I 'L IitC ·p:c:ftt'@\qcql it. Xtmaikatva or the unity of Atman Brahman). fii4d«¥1 fi1v:rr ~ OlIqfd60d II" sn. fqq:()d!!Oldl ~. 434. in the same way as pot-ethers and jar-ethers etc..3-3-37). SBh. Sankara quotes a text in his commentary on Badarayana's Sutra3l[(tl~d: qf{oIlG[ct.IQ(ltliC€i~fdrqql<f4Ft1ij'l . I~ fen tnt 'if ~ l{jH'I":fICf~IfC::!OIq'*lGjld{4 ~ijOIOlIfd- etlif{OI: etllf{cqlq)~~. 'g-~-~. THE ESSENTIAL IDENTITY OF THE UNIVERSE WITH BRAHMAN 20.to teach the Divine Nature of Jiva by negating his (apparent) transmigrating nature.~ ~~ 3iQfjdQlcq(qIf~!10ldl. however. We do not hold that God is taught (in the Srutis) to be a transmigratory being. '~ m~ e*wOlf. ql'It€§14:.j eo Ch I~ 1Ch 'i (c-h I~II i tj fj Ii. The universe as an effect is nondifferent from the cause or Brahman and is essentially one with Brahman.

464. it is stated.. "real' ."'1" .24 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA "It became the fonnful and the formless. It remains beyond. Needless to remind the .. and.GQ\. the knowledg~ of it they call right knowledge. arising even with the help of the Sruti which is unreal from the Paramarthic view.q{'q!·aw::If·-g:f:q . ~ "q ~ "q The '"lm(6\qC1~ ~ O!II'fctIOllI'fldlrq&i "i I n~'i ~ qf{oll14lfC:ticfOllCli! ({lfCle:C'4 s:!fct qtld 3!ClfClt5i3d ~. The criterion of Reality in this latter case. 2-1-11." SBh. remains unimpinged.. is evidently causal efficiency. 25 the undefined. he cites empirical objects like mirage-water. and a snakebite in a dream producing 'real' effects. however. It is this potency of names and forms that has been declared by Sankara to be a figment of avidyii in the quotation cited above. " . He says there that the real is that which never changes its self-identity (~~ ~ ~ l' ~ -mt_ ~ -:q ~~ ••.. Sankara has defined the abs~lute Satya (Real) in his Bhashya on the text ~ ~1'i4+fi ~ "Brahman is reality. In its real aspect. All misconceptions about Sankara's Vedanta which impute to Brahman a power called Maya in virtue of which It manifests Itself as the universe. for the power of Isvara'." In the sequel of this text.j(qI"6i:J ~." SBh. undefinable as that Brahman or other than It.. consciousness. when he discusses the possibility of real knowledge of the unity of Brahman..::. 2-6. all such phenomenal activity and unevolved. We should not confound these two divisions. At the same time. The truth that Brahman is really impartible.llet6IU(llctqqf{ulct. "Brahman becomes the subject of all such conventional treatment as transformation into the universe.~ "The real became both the real and the unreal". since that special aspect superimposed by avidya is only a play of word'). and infinite' (Tai. and "unreal' • have been employed.. " question therefore arises what sort of Parinems (transformation) is meant when the Sruti says that Brahman becomes all this ? Here Sankara answers :3ifqillChf<?:ld'"l d0il1.\ 3ifqtlICfi~ctfl"l '1(14~q~ ql:qI{~'4Ulql. 2-1). and not maintenance of self-identity. only in its special aspect of differentiated or non-differentiated name and form. the defined and THE REAL AND THE UNREAL Tai. 2-1-27. are therefore to be accounted for as being due to confounding of the two significations of the word "Shekti' and mistaking the Shakti or "potential aspect of the universe of names and forms. 429. In the Sutra-Bhashya also it is declared l{4l(iqul ~ ~sl1: 'B' 1W1T11: I~ ~ ~ "That which retains its identity throughout is real . just because the same words. conjured up by avidya. Brahman is really real whereas the phenomenal world consists of objects distinguished into empirically real and empirically unreal. suspected poison.

THE METHOD OF SUPERIMPOSITION AND RESCISSION 23. 3-27. they say. 14-3 would convince the reader that this is no mere conjecture on our part. GAU~APADA AND BADARAYA~A doctrine of non-causality all at once. Gaudapada himself sets forth the rationale underlying the method in these words :- 22. we have already shown (para 7. 28). is only a device to convince the student of the essential identity of the socalled effect even from the empirical stand-point. q)f. Saitkara on the Sutras follows strictly in the footsteps of Gaudapada. stressed by some modem critics who suppose that Gaudapada occupies a superior position in thinking. .26 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA THE METHOD OF SUPERIMPOSITION 27 reader that the sub-commentators who treat the potential form of this figment of avidya as avidyiisbakti. As a matter of fact.q) and called by another name 'Miiyii~ A careful study of the Bhashya on VS. for Badarayana interprets all Vedantas and shows how the causation attributed to Brahman. 6) that Sailkara's Introduction to Vedanta-Mimamsa is specially aimed at pomnng out how Avidya or the mutual superimposition of the Self and the not-self. Here it is said that whatever has been predicated of Brahman at the commencement of an exposition. whereas BadarayaI). is undefinabJe as being or non-beiug. to show how all the Upanishads adopt what is known as the method of adhyiir6piipaviida or the method of conceding certain facts intelligible from the empirical standpoint at first.K. p. not this'). We now come to the consideration of the contrast between Gaudapada' s Karikas and Badarayana's Vedanta-Sutras. will at once see the shallowness of this hypothesis.a's is only a theological effort or to interpret "Jsnmedi' causality as expounded by the Upanishads. which. inasmuch as he takes the whole range of experience covering all the three states of consciousness and arrives at the impregnable conclusion of Ajiitivada (the doctrine of the unborn Brahman). ~"l1Cf: I flcf14w&l~ ~suf ~-~G. is the presupposition of all Vyavahara including causation. and then negating if after the inquirer has been led to the final truth. Readers who have gone through the immediately preceding paragraphs of this booklet. is invariably negated by the Sruti at the end by the proposition ~ T:t'ff ~r~qfl'·'I1t"41 (Now this is the Atman described as 'not this. Gaudapada actually says in so many words (OK. Lastly the predicate initially stated as a means to understand the truth. (~<~<f. He himself accepts the mayic birth of Pure Being and rejects the asatkiiryaviIda (the theory of something non-existent coming into being (Vide G. 4-42) that causality is taught by the wise for those who are not prepared to understand the < ~ ~ ~Fcl~ctlra&Ji@la s:rCf)I~id 111ft..c('tHl.

~-~'-\. In particular GauQ. 471. ~-~-~~J "Creation taught in various ways by using the illustrations of clay. iron.1t::fq rii:"H:fcll(l_. is only a device for the purpose of introducing to the student. " SBh. This same method of deliberate imputation of a characteristic.. the Truth of the Unity of Atman .fcH1iff1~~II®: ~R£jT ~: -mSqcll(!~ ~ ~.. each of these stars ~eing cal~ed Arundhati for the time being. related to Reality as such. f1~~f~cij~tqfq '(1'T"ffi1 ~ 3iLj@IB3W. Finally.. and its subsequent negation..q{(qI. the tiny star Itself is pointed to and the priest says 'This is the real Arundhati .28 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT S:ANKARA REFERENCES TO THE METHOD IN SANKARA'S WORK 29 should never be regarded to be as real as Reality itself. crrr. actually there is no difference intented in any way.r ~ 'R11T~ ~~: I a::ifCl'ElICflR?ict'1l101¥4&\C(ttH~~\. 1-1-8 also.:) l{4fCJI:. is to show some stars very near the actual star and fix their attention upon them successively.:. That this method of deliberate ascription and subsequent abrogation. "Nor does this Sruti teaching creation.. This extract refers to the customary practice resorted to by Purohits (priests) when they have to direct the newly married couple to look at the tiny star Arundbeti. for it is only in the sphere of empirical life consisting of name and form conjured up by avidya.. 'liT. 2-1-33. <:IT ~ ~. in VS.)M~.. This analogy has been again applied by the commentator when he has to explain why the Anasmeys kosa (the sheath of food) or body and other ve~cles have been ten~tively called by the name of Atman even while the Sruti purports to teach the innennost real Annan which alone deserves that name.apada expressly says 'idt. where he argues that if the Pradhana had been . and sparks etc. REFERENCES TO THE METHOD SANKARA'S WORK IN 24." G. 1-4-14) and repeatedly draws our attention to the fact that the Sruti does not seriously purport to teach creation as a fact from the transcendental point :-. ~. II ~I. The method followed usually.m .~4dm ~&1c{I{l~ 'iffi.-ft..K3-15. Sankara quotes this very S16ka in his Bhashya (SBh. ~'4Ic(l4fctqlt::..... ~-~-~~. This circumstance also should not be forgotten in this connection.!i.!fq . ~~lctF§.q -tq fcH::qda:{t:{_ II ~:m.. I called the other stars by the same name just to lead your eyes towards the actual Arundhati'..:> ~ .. ~s~m Cfi~ I II which being the very Self of the seeker is neither objectifiable by nor in need of any means of knowledge has been stated time and again by Sarlkara in his Bhashya :<:j~ ~ . has been steadily kept in view in teaching Reality devoid of all specific features. has been referred to in Sankara's Bhashya.



~ '~:qlfUlqlq' ~ ; (f~

tentatively called Atman in the Sruti "He is Atman, and thou art that' (Ch. 6-8-7) as insisted upon by the Samkhyas, then the Sruti should have advised the seeker to abandon that idea after the analogy of Arundhati, lest the enquirer should stick to the notion of its reality (~111 ~ !!@OIql("qi1!iqrr::r<~ ~
~ I)


'1I.~-!R· 31~_'1";fII~I'l-<.jlti!>lq:;;q

l'!q"'i4ct ,~x1q II ~.

fil'!~Ii4fqe:f ~


'IT. ~~-~~,





25. This method is the only one available for teaching the nature of Brahmatman, for the latter
is devoid of all specific features and as such, can never be described in positive terms. '. , That it was a unique feature of Sankara s tradition to recognize this truth even long before Gaudapada, is evident from a quo_tation from an untr~ced author, as found in the Gita-Bhashya (on G. 13-13, 14) :ucrn:q!Fulql~

"That the Reality 'is invested with hands and feet' etc., is stated here by presuming as though that were the characteristic of Reality, just to convince the seeker of its existence. Such indeed is the teadling of those conversant with the riglJt tradition_, for they say By means of false ascription and rescission, that which is without specific features, has to be explained." GBh.13-13. 797.

As this traditional method has been treated at length elsewhere, * I refrain from entering into details here.

26. This Vyavahara is two-fold as already (para 15, p.14) explained. In the first place, Laukika Vyavahara is the human procedure of thinking, speaking, and acting either to acquire what is desired or to avoid what is disliked in common life. And in the second place, Veidike- Vyavahara relates to (I) injunctions or prohibitions with regard to kannas (religious works laid down in the Vedas) which point to the means of attaining what is liked or avoiding what is not liked in a future birth or in other words, beyond the ken of perception and other means of secular knowledge. There ate injunctions of Upasanas

"ffil ~sf~ft?I{l~@'{
tiCfR£ffqqfGf(1L{ II



fl4'"11C!('(:I fc1'5dre " ~ ~- ~ ~.

tlaR<4 1uII\ffii

These three lines, being a verbatim reproduction of the Svetasvatara (3-16, 17), ascribe the organs of all Jivas to Atman and then rescind the ascription in the end. Sankara remarks :
~ fil~ljl('S\q'"ltlfffil{€tlf~ ~~ qi"tCfl&<4


* 'How to recognise the method of Vedanta' - published by the Karyalaya.




in the Upanishads also which yield particular results in this or the other world, just like the karmas treated of in the Karma-kanda (portion of Veda dealing with karmas), These are included in the Jfiana-kanda or Vedantas, only because they are psychic activities and like Vedic knowledge, they are also ia11asya ('secret' in the sense that extrovert minds cannot grasp their nature). The principle Vedic Vyavahiira, however, is the teaching of the Upanishads and the effort of seekers to understand it in so far as it relates to Brahman as It is, in the transcendental sense. This circumstance has given rise to a"number of misconceptions with regard to the practical nature of Sankara's Vedanta. These misconceptions have arisen chiefly because of not bearing in mind, whether Sankara is speaking from the Vyavaharic point of view or from the Paramarthic point of view. FUNDAMENTAL AVIDYA INVOLVED IN ALL VYAVAHARA 27. We may now proceed to cite some instances of such glaring instances of misconception with regard to the fundamental doctrines of Sankara' s system. At the very outset, Sankara draws our attention in his Introduction to the Sutra-Bhashya to a natural phenomenon in Laukika Vyavahara, viz., how it is natural for man to think and act as though there were real facts corresponding to the expressions 'I am so and so' and 'This is mine", quite oblivious of the misconception of the mutual superimposition of the

real Atman and the unreal not-self involved in this prodcedure in the face of the extretnely opposite nature of the two ;-

. This apparently innocent pronosmon has given nse to a curious disagreement among Sankara's followers themselves : "It is but proper to expect that there can be no adhyiisa or superimposition (a:rumIT Does this proposition represent the pnina facie view or the cardinal truth itself? This has been a moot-point among Sankara's critics. For one who notices the statement that "this is an instance of human behaviour (~t1f1I"hlsli IffiCfi&Jq~I{:) to proceed on the supposition "this not-self is me . and ~hat ~is same is mine', there would be no difficulty III taking the who Ie passage as worth its face-value and interpreting it as meaning that it is a natural bent ?f t~e human mind to proceed on this assumption, inspite of the fact that it is a Himalayan blunder to take it for truth. This conclusion is further supported by the subseqnenr assurance ; "This being .so, that on fi:r~

m ~ ~.





which something else is superimposed, is not affected by the merit or defect of that other even in the slightest degree (at'1I1!~allrq ~ "1 ~urn), thus confirming that neither the real Self is in any way tainted by the defects of the unreal not-self, nor the latter raised to a higher status by this superimposition. AN UNEXPECTED INTERPRETATION TURN IN THE OF ADHYASA

hypnotized by this interpretation and believe to this ~ay that this sub-commentator was a direct disciple of Sankara, although, curiously enough, that the writer himself never expressly claimed to be such! The fact remains, however that, in the Bhashyas of Sankara the word MithyifiiJiina (fiTv.mrR) has been invariably used as an equivalent of Adhyasa and





28. A misconception that all vyavahiiric pheno-menon including that of adhyasa desiderates a material cause, was responsible for a subcommentator's twisting this Sankara's crystal-clear statement and founding a sub-school of advaitins who disregarded Gaudapada's Ajiitivada. That guardian of Sailkara's traditional pure non-dualism, had already warned the followers of the tradition thus : ft" lWf11r \iPi ~ ~ TI~: II "Illusory birth, is consistent for a really existent entity, but not an actual birth" (GK. 327). This Upanishadic truth was set aside when the sub-commentator tortured and twisted Sankara's expression filt:4I~I"fp1r4'd: (by reason of or owing to a

and other words synonymous with it, are exclusively used for Adhyasa, and whenever MithyifiiJiinahas to·

be accounted [OJ; it is said to be occasioned by want of discriminstion; but never as the effect of some material cause called ~avjdyii' or ~avjdya-sakti'
clouding the Brahman nature of Jiva, as this subccmmentator insists throughout his work. As this has been shown by me elsewhere*, I desist from entering into greater detail here. A single quotation from the GIUi- Bhashya will quite suffice here~~: fqt:l4fa:qf4oTl:








(1fG~CfI#lHI- ~1{)fq(1fllf<\ij(1lf~ti4IJICI({ ~~54~ti4'lPn

I ;frr~:

miscon-ception) to mean flw-:rr~~, ~: ftS%,I1: I (Mithyiij-ffiinam means nescience, which is unreal or undefinable ; adhyasa is owing to it, that is to say, has that for its material cause). Again, adhyasa is not merely superim-position, but the adhyasta, egoity which is superimposed ! A large section of Sankaritcs have been



1ft. ~. ~~-~~.


"(This is) the contact of Kshetrs and Kshetrajiia (the object and the subject) opposed to each other in their intrinsic nature. It consists of the superimposition of mutual identity The 'Penchepiidikii-Prasthiuuun', a Sanskrit work containing a critical appreciation of the sub-commentary ; published by the Karyalaya,


fr dSqq~: I >Tt:1RT~sfQ: ~d Gfq ~Cfi &:llru C"ll?. >f~ ~ err ~ Cf1~f.:flq . owing to want of discrimination between these two.ClI ~ I~ 3iq:fi~d... DISPUTES ABOUT AVIDYA-SAKTI 29. 1-4-3.s:: I "q flil4d'i_.{lj oqq~W: I -q~ ~ ftcf"tl~~CflI'l \Jj"jql. What is more serious. ~ fl:rUlI~I{jqGl1ldflt1£IR~~Hl{I~{l'\1i1'd{I~I€lq4PI:{qRJ.1tl1cllfq~lI l'Ifd"l1ei f1m?i I ~ ~ "Ilqfq fcmT (1C'ChRUlfl'I31V.!I: I >T'tlIYiC. iiill\JjI.i'jqlft:j- The reader will at once notice how this sentence is a re-echo of the Adhyasa-Bhashya making the meaning of the latter clearer if that were needed. for unlike the author of the Pailchapadika. (This is) just like the contact of a serpent. . fi:.. ~-~-t'6.f ~ It is evident that the author of this sub-commentary also identifies avidya with A vyaJqtantiJnariipa(undifferentiated seed of name and form) called Maya by Sankara. '" Nmf'tlCfl{OI4l- .p:j.l3-26. at the hands of later speculators.f ~~'*:C1'i_ ~f411f<- mct. ~~ -~ I ".~:q ~ ti'8I{>lq::." GBh.i. ~: . wtrFt~ 1:fr:IT.f ::qlfqEhqlM~tiRl ~~:. He emphasizes that objective avidyas are really numerous and that they have each a Jiva for their locus. ~~ ~~: ~~"illIF{4f.('1{. he has interpreted Mithyiijiiiina in Sankara's Introduction to mean superimposition and not avidya sakti. ~r4f'i ylp{{ ~ B 5:. is Maya (appearence) invented by avidya 3lr~'lII"hwqcl ~ (. The later doctrine of Avidya-Sakti as the material cause of adhyasa. 3i'iIf«~:lI.~~: II . this scholarly sub-commentator treats superimposition as an event in time as though time were not itself superimposed! For.S:_. is that even in the case of adhyasa.. 1!. An extract from another sub-commentary will make it patent as to what amount of confusion has been created out of the original disregard for Sankara's teaching that avyaJqta or undiffemtiated name and form constituting the Universe.ij~ w1ii0G:. This sub-commentator says:".. It has to be further ascertained by scholars whether this innovation convicts him with the charge of self-contradiction.qt1._~{C1C1\ ". (a contact of) the nature of misconception.~ ~ ~ i.11: fl~fI{qf'''liiF¥:r.l\Jj"s:ji{qCl ¢iOi!:rd)f~f(1 "q 3ioql~d- 3"lfqill(€lql~ol ~"fi&. within a rope or nacre etc.:mif£lHlfC:. \iT."0.q:ql{: fi:rfu II Vachaspati Misra's Bhamati on SBh.q«fl"1"I~ II ~eft. a:JRI~ ~ ~~ ~. silver etc. 31fqEl!f!GB<t::lql~ ~~fOJ1'1~fqIFdl~.~: fl'"l«'1Bfll{)=tijG!>IflJg:.\~I~rql'Aql~f"14~.llfqfj41{fq~'I:lRl_ I CR!. We shall now quote an extract from a postSankara follower of the exponent of the hypothetical avidya referred to above.36 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA DISPUTES' ABOUT A VIDYA-SAKTI 37 and that of the properties (of these two) owing to want of discrimination between Kshetrs and Kshetrajiia.826. has been the mother of still more glaring misconceptions and disputes about the locus and the object of the hypothetical evidye and the number of avidyas. nW..l ollfq tll . he writes there: (~) oqq~I{HIf<d~1 ~f1f1(Cf!: ~ I ~~: ¢i'11fc:.4IfG'ii TIv::r ~: 1>rtlH~CfIc€l'i (1S-.

. ms~~: . mostly because of their postulate that it is positive potency clinging to some one and projecting or evolving into the unreal appearance of not-self and the _universe. may also be deemed to have been warded off by our reply to the question raised above. 510. the question is superflous at that stage. ~~rfi'(f81 '?r "And this defect that is imputed to the system by some. and hot disputes have been raging among the followers of these sub-commentators for defending each one of these alternatives and refuting the other two views. then there is no one to whom the ignorance belongs!" SBh. Sailkara anticipates another objection and. It is obvious that according to this view. where there is duality. [Sankara means to say that it may be granted that duality ~ . have been alternatively the dogma of the different schools of sub-commentators. is himself ignorant of the truth. 510. constitutes the locus of this avidya. q"1{1I1HI~'~:. +1fg:t1111('q1({_ 'g'-~-~. sub-commentators have been considerably exercised over determining the locus. lm ~: ~ Cml ifll31l$j'i{q~ ~(I'h1{I'>IlIfEll{_~ q:)ft(filt. viz. II ~. shows its futility thus :- <itsfi:r ~q/(=til~d ~f?i:li( 3'ladljQqF-aF<fd.-:t1fqEJlIl ~~.I'IJitT: We shall have occasion to refer to this theory of beginninglessness once again later on. That aU this display of speculation is so much labour lost from the genuine Sankara standpoint. 'ill. Accordingly. there can be neither any question nor reply concerning anything. and so. For they are supposed to hold that Atman would have a second beside Him in the shape of avidya ! S Bh. the question about a locus for avidya can arise only at the level of the empirical life. But when it is known that Brahman or Isvara is the only Reality.H:(:q a:rmrn: ~ II DISPUTES ABOUT AVIDYA-SAKTI ~ ~: I :f«l~P{ II 39 ~(1{d{ltlm:flq(a:H:. Three different views. One who raises the question. (1) that the Jiva alone. is obvious from Sankara' s express statement in his Introduction that Avidya is only a mental mixing up of the Real and the unre~L As for the 'locus' of this avidya according to Sankara. 4-1-3.38 en 3'Hifco( MISCONCEPTIONS ~q(\~1 ABOUT SANKARA ~sqli. or (2) Brahman Itself or (3) Pure Consciousness devoid of the distinction of Brahman and jivas. 'To you who are asking this question !' (Objection:-) 'But I have been declared to be Isvara Himself by the Sruti !' (Reply :-) If you are thus awakened. object and the effect of avidya.~ ~ ~. we would do well to remember what he himself says on this point: Post-Sankara ~ ~ "If it should be asked •And to whom is this avidya or non-enlightenment ?' We answer. ~~o. 4-1-3. whatever.

is inevitable for an embodied being. have altogether Ignored Sankara's appeal to universal intuition in his exposition of Adhyasa and showing how the convention of the distinction of Pmmiituis (means of knowledge) and Prameyas (objects of Prama~a) itsel:. They have failed to appreciate the dictum of Sailkara that all attempts to prove or disprove by means of vyavaharic Pramanas. Ignoring the distinction of the vyavaharic and transcendental standpoints. It is the negligence of this distinction. will recall how SaIikara makes use of this dictum of the superimposition of the body and Atman again and again. and that pleasure and pain can never touch one who is bodiless.] WHY NO PRAMANA IS NEEDED TO PROVE AVIDYA OR ATMAN 30. and how Atman IS . he comes to the conclusion that Srutis and Smrtis aided by reason.is.40 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA MlSCONCEPTION ABOUT DISEMBODIEDNESS 41 is possible only so long as the unity of Atman is not intuit~d. 2-2-28) to be a general rule. is all the result of embodiedness due to avidya and other defects. Thus. To an objection that bodilessness might itself be the effect of Dharma ~'licm:i~ 'possibility and impossibility of a fact are to be concluded according as there is or . not some Pramana (means of knowledge) to prove u (SBh. has been the sole reason why some Vedantins have mistaken certain stateme~t8 of the Bhashyakara as expressing his final conclusion regarding Vedanta. He quotes the Chandogya Sruti which says that being beset with pleasure and pain. and as such can neither prove avidya nor disprove the existence of Atman without any specific features. was perhaps responsible for the sub-commentators to make an attempt to show that their hypothetical avidya could be 'proved' by means of some or all the canons of evidence. Thus taking the statement }. to show how Final Release from the evils of mundane life. but at the transcendental level. in his commentary on the fourth Sutra after describing the whole gamut of life possible for individual selves. Both these defende~ts and opponents of Sailkara. there is no duality wbatever. is only to recognize one's eternal bodilessness. show that the gradation of pleasure and pain felt by creatures. The reader of Sankara's Bhashya. pre-supposes Avidya or Adhyasa. thus leading to the conclusion that Final Release or bodilessness is no effect of Dhanna or religious duty which can only give its result to an embodied being. draws its very breath from Adhyasa or avidya. ~~ . MISCONCEPTION ABOUT DISEMBODIEDNESS 31.]q!OI!>lqfl1Q1npi~ fu the transcendental Reality demanding no Pramana or any proof. that has induced some adverse critics to charge Sankara with postlulating the Absolute Atman without the support of any Pramana.

' . 'Therefore. Failure to . for embodiedness is due to a SBh. 60. 1-1-4. ~-~-¥. And after showing at length how embodiedness is only due to a false identification with the unreal body." SBh. by virtue of Brahma-vidya). "(Objection :-) Bodilessness can come only after the falling off of the body and nat to one.42 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA I MISCONCEPTION ABOUT - rne BEGINNINGLESSNESS - OF SAMSARA 43 .f I 'tWi ~~lfC{<:ticqll\ for it is the intrinsic nature of one' s Atman" "No.FMI rnt:. ~~~'\. Videhs-mukti (Release after death) is the only release in the primary sense and that Jivenmukti (freedom while the knower of Brahman. 58. 4-1-14. MISCONCEPTION THE BEGINNINGLESSNESS ABOUT OF S~SARA In the face of this unequivocal declaration supported by intuition and reason. is alive). sn.lI~ {HIU{(qBl fut ~sfq ~o. he concludes - "(The particle 'tu' in this form is intended) to emphasize that inasmuch as virtue and sin. living. he replies ".f ~. karma.f. the Vyiikhyiina schools have succumbed to the belief that release is really an event in time to be attained after exhausting all karmas. embodiedness being only due to a false notion. <fftffiL ~S~IUUqt:t. 1-1-4. Sankara has given expression to two different views about embodiedness of individual selves. and to be destroyed (in the case of sin). )$-~-~)$. which are the cause of bondage having been shown respectively not to taint Atman (in the case of virtuous act). sleep and states of consciousness. to assess a statement of Sankara's found elsewhere in the Bhashya :- m fi v:ci tn=rft:fl:f£I·>14. The same is true of the belief in the beghmingless nature of samsara (transmigratory life). II ~. he writes: quite exhausted! This is most probably because they have been unable. can be only secondary release since he has the body to sustain which a little portion or residue of avidya continues to be till the fructifying karmas are 32.. f1lVOlII'I¢l\ttf"1f'4'd(f. '8 ~1{1{('En::Q II li: 'IT. and creation and dissolution of the world.[j~ rql~ tJ m Ili~~ ~~. reJease must necessarily ensue to the knower after his body has fallen off. birth and death. according as he takes the thought-position of the really real (Paramartha) or practical life (Vyavahara). Failing to see that the convention of the eschatological mukti is only a concession to the Vyavahiiric view that man has a body. it is to be concluded' that bodiJessness is the nature of a wise one even while living" SBh. Again in the commentary on the same Surra. 3F{1 (l(C=ci ~ '. or Religious duty. some of the subcommentators have ventured to proclaim that according to Sankara. "(Reply :-) No misconception. ~I\l{qld ~ 31~@l tilfr. Wr ~ '. 529.

266. there would be no fallacy whatever. ~-~-\5. since the series of embodiedness and the previous karma accounting for it. and his being an agent of such actions. since embodiedness has to be proved on the presupposition that he is an agent of good and bad deeds.:r '. Disregarding this distinction of view-points many doctrinarians . 3-2-7. 1-1-4) that Atman being devoid of any relation to action. I 3i"lIFc:it6I . As for the want of conciousness of anything in sleep. In conformity with this distinction steadily kept in view. his embodiedness cannot be inferred to have been the result 01 a.q~l+ 6-qlf~H:iq ct q f{1I q_ q {{C\q Iq f~fl1 q [ q P{4 II ~ (tsq:m-m\ ~ m.f Cflt!Olfqwf)Wi"Zl ~ I 'fCl Gj \111 If{(1q) ~ J fCI{C\qtqft1ef~ tiqf'd'ifFf8.44 MITSCONCE¥TIONS ABOUT SANKARA M1SCONCEPTICN COl'CERNING rna STATE OF DEEP SLEEP 45 note this distinction has been a fertile source of different views concerning all these.. may be conceived to be consistent on the analogy of a series of the seed and its sprout. ~-~-\5.' Fq"1Hldlf~ ~ J li. 'fC'j{. 266. (SBh. . Sailkara writes :- 31fi:J ql f4 (CI11. has to be concluded by supporting his embodiedness. death and dissolution of the universe.. in the following paragraphs.:.1t1 q (104'\G." SBh.(~f. This is of course from the paramartha view-point. which renders life a really real continuous something that rests on the basis of time. it is proposed to say that he attains his own form on the dissolution of that foreign aspect" SBh. however. Elsewhere.. ~~G. THE CAUSE OF WAKING.both Sankarites and followers of other traditions . RE-BmTH AND CREATION 33. Sankara has argued (in SBh. the Acharya argues ~ g 'If on the other hand. 3-2-7. He denounces the pnms p facie view that the present body may be the result of karma performed in a previous life on the ground that this is an argument in a vicious circle. there is no time when Jiva has not become one with Brahman. Only in view of the seeming foreign aspect which he assumes in dream and waking owing to contact of conditioning associates. and since it would be a regressus ad infinitum to think that there is a beginningless series of embodiednesc fll1d previous karmas to account for it (31. "Besides. "It is but reasonable that the Jlva merged in Pure Being (Brahman) is not conscious because of (absolute) unity. . for one' s intrinsic nature cannot be alienated.*.. he says :~ tiq$l'Rtlth'1~Cfi('CII. We shall briefly notice these differences concerning these doctrines. we suppose that transmigratory life is beginningless' . It is obvious that this line of argument is based on the view-point of Vyavahara which takes for granted that birth and death are actual happenings in time."1Yrevious karma. MISCONCEPTION CONCERNING THE STATE OF DEEP SLEEP 34. ". 2-1-36).(fG'"l r).have insisted that there is really avidya or some other Latent cause in sleep. m.

46 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA VARIOUS VIEWS CONCERNfNG DEEP SLEEP 47 In the face of this unambiguous statement a subcommentator writes :31~ ~ tRl4[(aq ~1:Slj{\ctRIMgro ~ q{t{[r14'qTC{~: mn fqqftct~Hr. of Reality. simply because of ignoring this distinction of Vyavahara and Para~artha "__ (1) A famous writer on Advaita Veda~ta. b e POSSI e. (3) Another Dvaita Vedatin has gone to the length of employing this waking memory of sleep for proving that not only the individuality of the self.. are found to be absent in dream and dreamless sleep. there is some use inasmuch as misconcept~on IS . in the form '1 did not know anything in sleep'. co~cem~ng the state of deep sleep. • for m that removed.'.having been removed root and branch ~wm~ to the absence of the dawn of the knowledge. the real Atman alone be th~ sta~e of sleep. Comment is needless.:j~~:. however. What is more important is that the waking memory of sleep. A number of misconceptions have assai~ed Vedautins of different levels of thought. was only a device in concession to Vyavahara. Jiva would be in that state only so long. am ~ I cr:rr fu ~ ~ '1cffu ~cR1'l1 d-cq~HI~ Btt_{1Cfl1ef1=la:rfClElI41 t1CfiI~IIq_ \ijIUAA'"1t1~ ~lct+4 02j~ ~ ~ II ~-~-~. 3-2-7. page ~~~. and that the time experienced in waking cannot be reasonably regarded as the substrate of all the three states. only Adhyaropa or a deliberate superimposition to be rescinded after the sole reality of Atman has been shown. because the three states are not actually happenings in any particular time-series. This was because he forgot to remember that the examination of the three states. commited this mistake when he undeltook to examme the three states of consciousness with the sole purpose of demonstrating that Atman alone as ~ (i~tui~ion) IS really real in as much as all things objectively . but also that 'time and ignorance' also persist to exist in that state of unconsciousness ! DEEP SLEEP 35. ~ut aVldya not . The writer was not content. who undertook to prove that the individual self is always the object of the notion of 'me' has made use of this indefensible argument of trusting the waking memory of deep sleep for the purpose of inferring the continuance of the individual nature of the self. is no real memory from the transcendental view..". page 696. with showing that Atman remains intact in all the three states.. hIS return (to the Jiva state) in the form of waking and dream would 'bI . also.. "If on the other hand. VARIOUS VIEWS CONCERNING experienced in the waking state. there IS par tl I onen '"'·S ror=rm ~:) ia . \. while Atman continues to maintain his self-identity. He insisted that ignorance also continues in sleep as is guaranteed by the waking memory of sleep. (2) A noted Bhashyakara." '" _ case. Bhamati.

II ({Clytfh1lCfftr fi1lql~l'1~fct~. 425. ~-~-~J ¥~'-\ . ( ~ ) 1:f~ wfci~sftJ O!lCj~I{: {'qgCl~O!lhHi: q <'II rqf. 425. SBh. :_an. Wl~ ~~ . ~_~_~. "J~s~ as eve~ in [he Supreme Atman without any distinch. Needles~ to say that the school holding the theory of avidyii-sakti clinging to Atman. SIon :- has been the source of misapprehen- (~) crm % II ~jN1flttlu)IGIClfq ~ ~~lf*f". . so also it may well happen in this case (of dissolution) also !" SBh. ¥~~. 2-1-9. . ."". even in the period of sustenance of the world as t~e~ d~ In a ct:eam . there is attained the mtnnsic s~te of absence of distinctions. ~~ fcf'lWIT 'qT.practical life that distinctions based upon Mlthycynana (or A Vldya of the nature of adhyasa) function unobstructed. take this passage to mean that even in deep sleep and samsdhi. Some teachers who pursue this line of thought..48 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA.. Another misconception of this same ilk.1'E4a sn. l!iiiiina (the theoritical aVldya-saktl).'iI'"l ~J 3ifcf'qIJI~Iq:ft fil*lI~HflIl'141FG(j(emt R:Tf: ({C4f~61fl:1 'lfq&qfd ~. must have surely allured them to fall into the trap of misconceptions mentioned in the two preceding paragraphs.~_ IS seen In . is absent only in the state of Ssmddhi (trance). qq ~-~lfm{j. may imagine here a voucher for inferring the continuance of that sakti during the dissolution period also.ons:. [On~ can very well sunnise that an interpreter imbued I~ea of mithyii (undefinable). will surely be expecting by now that some statement of Sankara's touching avidya in sleep and samadhi. 36. And he will not be surprised to find 'that the word Miihy§jiiana in the following . '?ust as in deep sleep and Samadhi. that 'sakti' persists to be in a latent fonn]. and yet distinction Tea~pears III waking as before on account of mithyi[jiiana not b~mg ~emoved.. The readers who must be familiar with the wrong track generally pursued by later Vedantins with regard to avidya. is to believe that all duality due to ignorance.:l filVlI 41 I1!OJ fd ilos] fcr'qT1f- fWffi ~. so also one may infer the potency of dlSbnctlons owing to Mithyajfiana. have conceded that subtle impressions of avidya lie dormant even in this Samiidhi These impressions have to be inferred according to them to be the cause of his coming back to the noramal state! SANKARA'S STATEMENTS REGARDING THE POTENCY OF DISTINCTIONS IN SLEEP AND DISSOLUTION 37. DIVERGENT AVIDYA VIEWS ABOUT IN TRANCE quotations. 2-1-9. DISTINCfIONS IN SLEEP AND DISSOLUTfON 49 The reader should be able to see that all such vagaries are founded on the dogma that memory is -possible even without a corresponding experience antecedent to it in the past. even while conceding that a trace of ignorance may continue to taint a knower of Brahman in waking till his fructifying karma is exhausted.

.f "It is in the fitness of things that there being no means of discrimination. I "ffij'v-q d5ql't1?~IM'I1cIT.50 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA MISCONCEvnON WITH THE IDENTITY OF JfVA 51 MISCONCEPTION WITH REGARD THE IDENTITY OF JIV A WAKING UP FROM SLEEP TO ?iscrinrinating (the jiva).. we do have a means for t:fl~If. C\. 38. (4) And fourthly if we suppose that each Jiva becomes finally free from samsara on his becoming one with Brahman during sleep and quite another gets up.ffq('il ~ ~ ~.n41~{'ilfc.. :}-~-f{. and (2) remembers what he had experienced in the past Moreover (3) the Sruti also says expressly that the same Jiva awakes. ~ sub-commentator has twisted this Bhashya to suit hIS pet theory of avidya-sakti as follows : l{Cl q"ll~r.{t ~ (Wi q:.:qj m<q'q(f ~.\ §3l{j1~lqFq \ilftlGq\ftl!f~~~d ~. the jiva associated with it.which is a species of the beginningless undefinable avidya. '. IS really not different from the real Paramatman .f ~: . ~o become manIf~st.f)CfiI{oi .~~ 'qT. 3-2-10) that the identical Jiva should be concluded to awake after sleep for (1) this Atman continues to proceed with what he had left half done during the previous day. 282.flCf)I{OIl'J:fTCml \Jlii1fcil<t{jo&{OI"l fq~<. ". Here Sankara anticipates an objection: Inasmuch as the jiva has become absolutely one with Brahman. in the present case. can also be distinguished. u:r ~. 3·2·9. Badarayar.:> f\rni'f .Vasana (impression of avidya) is directly opposed to Sankara's Bhashya on Sutra 3-2-7.. how can we discriminate any particular jiva from others ? Is it not impossible to take the same drop of water after it had been thrown into a sheet of water ? The teacher answers :~ mf fClct<.. And that conditioning associate flowing III a. According to this theory "Jiva being imagined to be such because of the conditioning as~oc~ate. 31N~ ~ ~ (." SBh. however. to wit. karma and avidya.. Hence in deep sleep and the like states..~ 9~ ~t(Uj'l II .:j~ldG:I~. :}-~-f{. Needless to say that this supposition of conditioning associate of the avidya . stream consistmg of avidya and its impression in the :~latlOn o~ cause and effect being easily distinguishable. t :qIF.."Hif%1 etc. Cfilf :qlfcldl ':ij - m . ~ng to the mani-festation or being overpowered by that conditioning associate.d(Oj1 t:fl14CfjI{OI~ §fq~:q <:1SQfl3c?i "\illq: m Bfq~ild(Oj1 ~ It ~. ." Bhamati.m says in a sutra (VS. Hence there IS no similarity between the two cases.::r4:q'"Illllfqffi q 'qR"~~ q{ql('q. ~l~. the drop of water cannot be taken up . he himself seems to be manifest or unmanifest... 3~2·9. he happens to be ~vershadowed and in states like waking etc. A similar misconception has persisted with regard to the identity of the Jlva awaking from deep sleep. that would go against the Veda enjoining karma or Upasana whose fruit is to be experienced at some distant time.qGfq ~q~ ~ BUlf.

ht. • 3"HIf~(.lJlyavifd? (the theory that there is only jiva) and Nanajivaviida (theory of many jivas). 1-1-2). where Badarayana discusses the question whether the same jiva awakes from sleep. we do believe and behave as if there are actually a number of jivas.. lit. the senses.fOIltl 41\jjls:j!{cHi at :s.4: ~: I using both the words naisargika (innate.52 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA DISPUT A110NS REGARDING AVIDYA AND JIVAS 53 THE ANALOGY OF SEED AND SPROUT AS A BEGINNINGLESS SERIES 39. The post-Sankaras who thus interpret this term here. As a corollary from what has been said above concerning adhyasa. has been extended earlier in this same sub-commentary to the adhyasa itself propounded by Sankara.. The discussion about the relative merits of Ek. Accordingly. ~-~-'\. This theory of a beginningless series of avidya and its vasana (impression) like unto the series of the seed and sprout.fi:tV1! #11of! q ~FkI{j~ ~~ ~flIrJlf'. when he says l{qt1£tA"1lf~{+ffi ~Bfilch1s~ fl:{VOlllOlfl4<'1*. ~ 0 • This is in implication of the word~: (natural) employed by Sankara as an epithet of Vyavahara here. he necessarily implies that there are many jivas in common life. And Sankara remarks :- mer crnftl t:i q "hr~ ~ llICl~<h1 q tfqrrnr <F~ ~: $fS q:ej 4(:. ! This. He says : 6qQ61{lrJtfc\dlll tll.. as some post-Sankaras have done. . the 'preceding set of intellect or mind). "tIT. natural) and saiidi (beginningless). of In Siltra 3-2-9. which occur in a beginningless series on the basis of time ! SOME NEEDLESS DISPUTATIONS REGARDING AVIDYA AND JIVAS 40.q ~. it follows that it is idle to discuss about the number of avidyas or to enter into the discussion ~bout the priority of avidya or jivatva. as foisted by its preceding mithyajfiana (misconception) is employed in each subsequent adhyasa as its cause."th{{Olfll 31~ course.1Roli ~Hlf~ {lf1 ih"H1 all { ~ q{f'1{I~tj('qf'"lM~: II tft q qp I: - 'l1TtRft .Cf){'I{j *pBS if)flI lOIr(jf"14(j~~t''f*1r''lf''''dr~41 "Cfiffisw:rflT ') V. overlook the concluding statement of Sankara. Further.r~~: '~'J~I\I I ~ "31il~"{W 1C1llli "11q IOf1{OI'N ~ I{: ~ ~~: ~~ -u ~ i{ClI4:i qlftr: II tcli q llafltltTI«il"lI<s:jl{.S.q("1 "l I Il C1lq~Cfl"11 Qci4q6le I ltCi -mtr n ~ .. drives the enquirer to the awkward position of presuming himself to be a knower adjudging the place of both 'adhyasa' and 'body' etc. is also futile. since from the vyavaharic standpoint.-. of course. 3l~\i I&f c. thus rendering adhyasa or superimposition itself an event in time projecting or falsely causing the appearance of the next set of body etc. $ flHl t ~ qr.l Cfi I. and the body etc. 11[. ~\9~. for according to this sub-commentary.i1 I ~ -qcf-qef . the Bhashyakara describes the universe as the sphere of action of numerous agents and experiencers of the fruits of action (~~ Cf. there is something which renders 'adhyasa' the very foundation of Sankara' s Bhashya weak.

this relation to the mind. 3-2-3) treats the creation of ~ream-objects in dream as wholly Maya. SaiJ. As Gaudapada says :- ~m ~: ~ o. 272.3-2-9. is due to mithyajfiana or Adhyasa.l1'ilI'"1d: II -. 2-3-30. it is reasonable to think that the same jiva wakes.kara says ~ S~f1f"l!r'*i!:W'"lrtjG.q ~ 't~ BUll ~1'"11~.. comparatively speaking. This being so. ~d in. so long as bondage contl~ues as a~aching itself to one Upadhi (conditioning ~soclate). '" "We ?ave explained at length again and again. that even in sleep and in the state of dissolution of the universe.~ ~o} . affil-:q fi:ltl)liill'if4 ~:~s-mr ~ .DISPUT AT10NS REGARDING A VIDYA AND JIv AS 55 54 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA '. may have misled the later Vedantins to Badarayana (VS.q ~ F-iqf-d<F«1 'l!: 'qf.:. Inasmuch as one and the same upadhi continues both m sleep and waking in the relation like unto that of :: seed and its sprout. that even the connection with this upadhi. Strictly speaking. and there is no sublation of mithyajiiana except by right knowledge. 15 argue that avidya itself continues to persist in such states. that it ~ure Being (Brahman) alone that is spoken of as a jiva owing to connecrion with a conditi~:ming associate. Elsewhere. 2-3-30. Fourth quarter (the Atman). for the latter . are latent in childhood . can be reduced to two states according to the genuine tradition of Sankara. according to Sankara's interpretation of the Siltra (VS. it is owing to the mithyajfiana (adhyasa) that this connection with the mind has come about for Abnan. the mind continues that jiva is a jiva.. 140. 3-2-3) and there is not even the smell of reality in their appearance. when one attains the ejtUt 1'f"it-.. continues to be in a latent form. the next siitra. i. this ~pit~et aJ}U is applied just because the nature of jiva IS dlf~cult to asc~rtain. And in conunenting on the next Siitra he wirtes : qlc{~c{ ~ ~~~:} dltFJGflctf4 ~ "Moreover. Failure to notice that this remark is from the vyavaharic standpoint. The dream objects are. according to Sankara. 41. . But m. Badarayana says.q II "And it is only SO long as this connection of the conditioning associate.!> ~ BBIn:(€f fClqqfB ~: "There is something else. just as capacity to procreate etc.-15.:i ~.q: ~~ II .r -. while discussing why the jiva is often spoken of as al). dream for him who takes the truth as and sleep for him who knows not the truth the misconception of these two sorts vanishes." GK 1.-\ ~ cqO&.qqtf~. quite unlike those in waking. Sankara •s actual position is. -.U (subtle). 138).we talk of one particular jiva. the talk of another jiva becomes neces~ary. the three states of consciousness. p. the case of bondage continuing to attach Itself to another Upadhi. 2-3-29.s:rn '" (lfq. 141. of course. .q~Ci:lc«FPt OtITttnf~ en 'Therefore." SBh." SBh. or because of the conditioning associate (the mind)' (SBh. (as it is) ." SBh.

\ Tfi'::( I&iClIilii cqqfu II ~. It is therefore wrong to believe that there is only partial merging in Brahman in these states. the diverse world consisting of ether etc." SBh..f ~YlfC::q~ . and suspect that there may have been some influence of Buddhism in treating both dream and waking as if they were on an equal footing. 42. it has been declared by the Sruti to be a name and mere play of words (see para 19 and SBh. ~~~. "Wf. ~~ ~ ~I~~ll II G'to. while that experienced in dream is sublated daily. himself. . unconsciousness. "tIT. Forgetting to note that all this is from the vyavaharika standpoint.( . The reader is here expressly warned against believing that the waking world is absolutely real. 2-1-14). continues to be identical as it is. 85. in any other state. swoon and other kindred states of Ifq f:?l~: 'fCl crt 11. \Olf(1f~4 ailfqCfifq~ . 1-1-9. he sees dreams and is called by the name of "msnss". and Sankara also writes : (j G:HH however. while the experience of waking is perception. and are not sublated like dream objects. later interpreters of Sankara. that perception of external objects in dream and other kindred states.o) "Moreover. has already anticipated this and sounded a note of warning: ~ ~~I("t(tEI<~['mt . there are some Srutis which teach that the Jiva goes to the dream-state taking the mental impression. Again. says. It is clear that according to the genuine Sankara's tradition. (<Iy<019:. ~. '''''ID~ 'l"F1L(1Li'~lq~: ~~ ~ 'l"i4'dI6lfq ~ I '8IUj~t:tU:II~~ ~-~-~o." fq4e. Sankara says that besides being sublated or unsublated. this experience of dream is only memory. ~ "111111:11<::([1. for there is a difference between waking experience and experience in these states (~~ ". ~-~-~~. 259.. ~-':(-~~). since as the effect superimposed on Brahman. are all on a par with deep sleep. "tIT. ~-~-~. ~ 'qqfu "Before the intuition of one's identity with Brahman. In explaining the meaning of this aphorism. A sub-commentator writes thus on this subject: rn:JJT(f. ~t. SBh.l~.1fe:\Olq-:>'i::i't ~ ifT~ ~ ~~ ~. "Being imbued with the impression of that perception.-ij. 3-2~4. So this statement about the wholly mayic nature of dream is only relative. there is a further difference between these two: 31f1:r ~ ~f(1l:tj! «<L.' Again. howsoever they may differ empirically owing to their origin and effect on life.. e-. ~.. Badarayana according to Sankara.f ~ ~ ~~fiqnHi"d)1 'l1Tllill.11: 'qT. mfij: '. Sankara.56 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA DISPUTATIONS REGARDING AV1DYA AND JYVAS 57 are governed by the laws of space and time. have supposed this to be his last word in the matter . they are ready to forego even the paramarthika view.

This superimposition may be subdivided into two kinds. there is the mutual superimpostition of the real inmost changeless Self as the Witnessing Consciousness and the me. In the first place. with its numerous modifications (l{q 4 G IH'\!'1flJ "Pi iltH<HI T. . giving rise to the mistaken distinction of the knowership. when a person feels thathe himself is benefitted or is the sufferer when ones son or daughter. 'I will if. has been confounded with the discussion of the states with a view to determine the nature of Absolute Reality. 1 walk' etc. it is not quite that kind of merging as it is in the case of deep sleep . 'I doubt it' or ~I have ascertained it'. has been called the secondary self (Gaupiitman) while "one's" own aggregate of the body and the senses mistaken for the self. the senses and the mind. 3." SBh. '1 jump. has been styled the false Atman (mithyatman). Or else it may be the mind also with its various modifications as when one thinks and says 'I desire'. The superimposed self in such cases.. takes place even while one knows that these objects are obviously distinct from one's self. In the case of the adhyasa or the mutual superimposition of the Self and the not-self. 43. is only a natural tendency of the mind to mistake one thing for something else which it is not ( afaff1H~~fO&:). This is the case. and that is why it is said to be partial merging. even while there is merging in Brahman. wife or relative is so affected. as well as certain objects external to the aggregate. according to Sankara. 275. when one feels 'I am blind' or 'I am deaf'. It is half.58 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA DISPUTATIONS REGARDING AVlDYA AND . for instance. the seat and object of the notion of me. page 639.(the object of the notion of me) and the objective constituents of the aggregate of the body. in the mugdha state or swoon. It is not surprising that this writer makes this observation. as we have already seen. A dhyas a." Bhamati.2-10. there is the mutual superimposition of the subject 'me' 3ifl'lOlftlll1fl:q{ . 2-1-9) pointed out on the authority of the traditional teacher Gaudapada. or it may be senses as for instance. in the face of the express declaration of Sankara : "We never say that the Jiva is only half merged in Brahman in swoon.il Hllf~ ~f!OIl tI (1Fl{QI flI. 3-2-10. It is evident that the distinction of the two states from the Vyavaharic standpoint. because of similarity and dissimilarity. And in the second place. This mithyatman may be the body as in the case of one's feeling '1 am fat' or '1 run lean'. 640. tf 7if . agency and the experiencing nature in the Self. this tendency is the reason. The reader will remember in this connection how all the three states are really mayic as Sankara has elsewhere (SBh.J1VAS 59 "So. Here the mistaken transference of the properties of the individual self and of the not-self to each other.

This is only a distinction without difference. and nevertheless. 2-1-22.209).~ . "In the Supreme Alman.the aid of Its intrinsic light. really surprising to find that different followers of sub-commentators. SBh. l{Chfiil:. At that level of thought.. ~- ~.ffiq" i:4RiiOij{t!. it is clear that he must be considered empirically speaking. It is therefore.:tfl"5:. and (3) abhiisa. he is the very same supreme Atman unchanged (q{~cl!rql1 uftq~ SBh.. but has been so spoken of by Sankara.. (2) prstibimbs-vitd« (the theory insisting that jivas are reflections of Atman in avidya).Tui df~q4~OIl~:Cfl{UI!f<lICl~). all of equal rank of reality. just as a surface and dirt are fancied to pertain to the sky". df'4fld ~ ~ c4)Ylq dt"1I401fG qf(Cfii?ml{ II 'qT.SBh..c.Cf ~ ufiq: 4{"IklOJ-n "l(1~4Cfllrl!:qCl Qf(jq'dOll:) not actually the same nor a distinct entity -. has been conjured up the jiva form quite opposed to this in nature. 302). they are all one with Brahman transcendentally speaking. absolutely changeless.. Elsewhere Sankara writes f'i('!Ol¥I<&~:S14'd){<t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ It\.viida (the theory that believes the jiva is only a semblance of Paramatman).~. 1-422) and that Jiva is only a semblance of the real Atman (31T\ffi1 1:. This would become evident to anyone who carefully persues the following statement of Sankara :- -a ~ "ffi~ In whichever aspect Jiva is presented. innumerable jivas. 269.60 Q6'-Jltlr"l11 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA DISPUTATlONS REGARDING AVIDYA AND .. If<ffiTfe.ITVAS ~ 61 Here this Witnessing Self is the eternal subject in so far as all egos with their belongings (such as the body) become known only with. This needless internal fight has been the result of ignoring that ancient Vedantins Gaudapada and Sankara had cited such illustrations only to clarify the teaching of the absolute unity of Atman. only because he becomes fit for discussion in the empirical field (oqQ6l{lj'Pll) in that notion..r The simile of ether in general pot-ether etc. 44. Q{l4lrtlf-"l 1 .. it has to be conceded that there are . (-. that as Jiva. For this Jiva has been considered by Badarayal)a in both of these two aspects. and not to formulate anyone definition of jiva-nature. . viz. to be as real.~~. has been used again and again in the Siltra Bhashya to illustrate the identity of Jiva with I§vara in spite of the apparent difference recognized from the empirical point of view (SBh. . 2-3~50. ever conscious and ever free in nature. Some sub-commentators have contended that even the Jiva is not really the object of the 'me' notion. One and untainted by anything else. ever pure. as the Pramanas and prameyas (means and objects of right knowledge). have internecine wordy war-fare with one another dividing themselves into conflicting camps of (l) the evechbmns-viide (theory advocating the limitation of jivas by the mind). 1-3-19. p.

f1wmt. 0." SBh.. 3-2-20.. has been proclaimed in the Sruti (Sve_: 6-11~ and san~ara challengingly declares that this Atman IS taught neither in the portion of the Vedas treating of injunctions (Vidhi-kantja) nor recognized in anyone of ~e speculative systems (tsrks-ssmaye).q(~ff~d~ ~ l. .~-~).c..62 '. the Jiva-siikshis (l) -q. It passes one's understanding how in the face of this declaration .f MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA DISPUTA nONS REGARDING AVlDYA AND rrv AS 63 tlcf~I#\t4 fu 'itt I'"di. \if1ClI"'d(OllClijl{: I "Nobody can insist on likeness in all respects between an illustration and the thing illustrated .'1f. 'TI. Another grievous blunder more culpable than the pluralization of the Witness. is the woeful misinterpretation of the epithet Prajiia found in the Sruti. ). can never be misunderstood by anyone who notices the other epithets which are used in juxta-position with it. 45. ~.subcommentaries could imagine that.i t:dRiCfilil: 4. ~.) And yet some have ventured to give the derivation of the word as ~ a:ijl': (mostly ignorant) just to make it fit in with their pet theory that there is avidya (ignorance) in sound sleep! And this in defiance of Badarayana's express use of the term to denote Isvara and Sankara's commentary thereon in accordance with . The implication of the plurality of Jivas in this Sutra is justified by SaIikara as due to conditioning associates (~Vh't<lldI4i n q~ 46. ~t21~ ~. for if there should be an all-round similarity.fUT: ~clr4fl. 'tt"f ~lR l:(tl "ffC.. This significant name given to the Witness of deep sleep in the Mfu).9. 287. sn. Yet post -Sailkara advaitins have entertained different views as to whether EkaJlva-vada (the theory of single Jiva) or Nifnifilva-vada (the theory of many Jlvas) is the more correct one ! 47. ~-~-~o. The doctrine of one and the same Witnessing Atman as the Self of all creatures. 2-341). is only due to conditioning associates as in the case of a reflection of the Sun. were many in number while the Isvara-sakshi (?) is one alone.Ci ~ I *p-qf~qf~ ~ tl4tli{E'c4 fu <itCH1~11:t~R1Cfi- \{14I:c0~ "flml II ~..iiikya.~t\. some of the followers of the . _ and he unequrvocally identifies this Witness with Isvara (SBh. the very relation of the illustrated and the illustration would cease to be there. The above-cited statement is in the context of an illustration given in the Sruti to cIarif~ the teaching that the jiva is really of the nature of Atman as Pure Consciousness devoid of all specific features and that his seeming nature as invested with features.~ WII.hi ~s"'dl1ft1tq ~: ~ 11"~ ~~ II (1lf. We have already seen how (para 38) according to Sankara. and not merely in a particular point of comparison intended. Badarayal)a has argued that the same Jiva Who went to sleep awakes to transmigrate according to his karma.

{ . is about the realtion of tvem-pedsrthe and tst-pedisthe (the Jlva and Isvara) in the proposition Tat-tvam-asi ('That thou art' as it is usually rendered). I 0!II!itHiCf4ttl{~: ~: I '1. ll". d~qfij' ~ ~<ild~ CfTCflf ~~ ~~'l-llCf- n) ~ ~~' ~ '~ ~: 1'!1~'"Ikq11 (.CI~H1OIH"< .TI f..:qIfG:ChI<OI1{ ~ .I~~Cfi'R1('qe:lm ~flflltMI Comment is needless. ~ (doubt) and m<f<r (misconception). Another needless controversy among the followers of the sub-commentators.) Wo ~ ~ dffi VliCf~1ct 3i\i1t{>5l{44{. NEEDLESS CONTROVERSY OVER TIlE SYNTACTICAL RELATION OF THE WORDS IN TIlE TEXT &TAT-TVAM-ASI' 48. 'r ~e.. UJlTffi . t-~-~'t ~~~. ~. knowledge). And Sankara says expressly that the Srutis invariably refer to Isvara when they use the word Prajfia.jl~(1.. .. CiGjOlfll{('CII([_ g ~ di(&lq~~I: tk .. is nowhere Sankara in this connection. . )!-~-.-~-~~.fkm.. ~t.. are the only obstacles that are in the way of right knowledge of Atman. 1 .Flf~ ¥fCf<ftfC1.. fl((ljj(Q . trfq' ..... ... FCfl::*H I (f3{~: '31ftt. . 'OJt"ll'l fi' C(l(ljllct_ I (f?Xfl'#)l"'dICj~fI"""""':+"'"' "'11~(~ 3ffi'l1T ~1~1'11("t!"'1IS~ 31GI' <:fIfu' (~. and the Sruti along with the Bhashya for the reader's information :(0 ~ (~) needless.. 1ffif: mm: I fi4iil6=lM&fOP. We shall just cite the Sutras... rClq411{1~: ~~: l ...TQ.msffir ~ ~1-:11qRi «'ilsm~q that ~ (absence of [It should be noted. •Avidya-sakti' which is postulated by sub-commentaries as one enveloping the Brahmic nature and projecting the transmigratory nature of the self.64 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SAr\JKARA CONTROVERSY OVER THE SYNTACTICAL RELATION 65 Sruti.. incidentally..:rr:::r' 1"1~II\!... )!-~-~t..... 'lTI.. ~~...{ ~ . Is it an apposition of the two words in their primary sense (Mukhya Samliniidhikaranya) or an apposition implying the sublation of Jiva's nature (badhii-samifniidhlkaranya) ? That this difference of opinion is wholly ~msftJ ttfd4~ ~ m ~e:h1If\Ojl(mRi ~ ~~IC{I{'ai ('I'm Skljlf(rtH'1l1l 'fi'flI6q'lH: 3i~Hthlllfqqtflt- ~d""4q4~~1Iqqrfu.~) ¥I!U(lq:_ ~ m~ &lqfG~If{1 ClI4f~~lf(1 II fiqF<tC\~"'1 "..".. -lrqf S'1RsoI401"li "'1ii1l1fi~lll- ~. The Sutras set Prajfia in contrast with Jiva... ~~41H'icfCb~IG:. ~ ~ ¢11'ilf..: I "ffif ~ ilql~(11 'tlGT~ 'Q~"lfff' ~~dl:\ qrq<f 'Bnij CfTCFIT~ wrt . ~ ~. Br.if t 'lcfttf'{' " 3Ff~ql(''1Cfi: ~ ~fltlf~Ol?lr~ !'Ifff<&t{.(:'.] mentioned by It is evident that the true nature of Brahman or Tet-pediirtbs is to be determined by using the principles of interpretation enunciated in the Purvamimamsa of Jaimini....: II ~.. and that there is no question of . may be readily seen when one considers the following statements in Sankara's Bhashya : ~~ ft' QCfi{Olltt II ~ it. ~-)!-t. ~ I C14"'UCjt?('OOq- ~ m~ . n~ l dc<l~1 ~ ~l1tF:H1 ~ ... ~ mfu: 'f'mL (fBl ~fGQ(qI([_ I .

~~_ ~. Hence all transmigratory life pertaining to that Jiva is also reasonable to be supposed as due to Avidya. v:cf ~ "q l4(4ll1frtlC'Si I'Ifdql€Jd ~. 'That thou art' cited above.~ ~ f.t{G«Ifd' Cflf¥ilG:> '" !.n. Ullld .ll~:ffi (f ~ ~ ~jI·~fft\ln'i'l{f4 . Here it is expressly affirmed that Isvara is not taught to be identical with Jiva. "Ifct4'{1c. tfHkt:trci '" B{iIf{Of: ~ ti(4lfh€j141~'1 ~~ '" ~fqf4qIGf~~ctftjrd Fq4{11!l0ldT -~ I fct 0 . is to be sublated before we can intuit the Identity taught by this and other such propositions.. on whose disapparance 'it is Prajfia Himself.G..1cRffl. AND THE TRANSMIGRATORY NATURE OF JlVA 49.~o.. This is not a rare inference from Sankara's explanation of the text.. whereas the Jiva's being of the opposite nature.~ .. In the case of Tvam-padiirtha or Jiva. fi:rVlT ~ oqqRI':(3d II . like the reflection of the s~ etc. So it stands to reason that the text requires the examination of Jiva nature till we fmally land at the actual entity which is identical with Brahman known through a study of the Sastra. THE CREATORSHIP OF ISVARA. ~ =q1~Ellq~ (lC:QlIQ 'G~: ~SM 'B.q: I """ 3ifqtll$l1~i4qF"df<fd 3q~:. the latter is intended to be taught as being one with' Isvara. It is therefore to be concluded that SaIikara sides tifllH4 ~~IC'G~ I tH(OO'jGlfI'i "q ~ with those who hold that the samsaric nature of the Jiva.. QH'4k14.tj) qqf'd. II ~ 'i'llfq?JI$('f{t4I« {!'Gf~ 67 any choice between the primary meaning or secondary meaning there. 'liT • ~ . that is taught by the Sruti 'That thou art'.4CflIF~C(<'l .ifk-tf4 ~ ~ II 1J!'f '('1.. the Sruti itself guides us in determining the final entity Chaitanya (Pure Consciousness) as intended by the word.66 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA THE CREATORSHIP OF ISYARA .. ~l. ~ I (1f.¥ .. The nature of Jiva is only superimposed by Avidya. -" (~) ~ ~ "if ~ ~ ~ .f1 \J1(1B". ¥-. Here are extracts from the Siltra-Bhashya wherein Sankara himself says so. t. AND mE . Here Sankara says that Prajfia or Isvara is the same Isvara.:.. and nothing more nor less..:j ~q6(1qILLl(i4If<lIOl<iI.. (~) ~ m-wt8T aW. is unreal. in so many words :- Here we are told that the Jiva is only a semblance of Paramatman. but only by negating the samsaric nature of Jiva. and consequently the teaching of his identity with Brahman by negating the Samsara becomes quite reasonable.~-~. Isvara's description as being free from all defects is real. This disposes of the difficulty arising out of tJ1~ teaching that Isvara is the creator of the universe un 3lT11m ~ ~ ~:.. This is the distinction to be recognized here...

the knower of the right Vedantic tradition (¥~I"ctfi~eJl:jfc\(t) as he has been styled by Sankara. remains intact in the face of these apparent differences. has shown how this illustration is aptly applicable to explain all the diffrences in empirical life :( ~) a:m'l1T ijJ I Cfi I ~ I q ~ ~~~. It remains as ether and yet has transformed itself into pots and pot-ethers. and (3) a number of pot-ethers. forms and activities do differ in empirical life. . jars.::l1 ft:TUlI~HI (0f ~ ~~ . just as for practical purposes. Here we are told that the Vyavaharic difference between Isvara as a creator and Jiva as mere creature. THE ANALOGY OF THE POT-ETHER. That adept in Vedanta. and therefore the difference between the two. for. had been already used by Gaudapada.qii~f.::lI '8ap~I~'1 ~~ 1ZCf 'K~~. ~-~.::. differ and yet ether as such.q4.r f~ {Bf m~ I II ~s~ d. (~) {C\qCfiI4€ql@OlI~'t:t 3iICfiI~If'4 .. pots.68 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA ANALOGY OF THE POT-ETHER AND ETHER 69 and as such precluding identical with the Jiva empirical world. This sloka says that the several names. thus accomodating itself to the convention of the differences of (I) ether in general. The ether (akasa) is the first product issuing forth from Brahman.as the Vyavaharic difference between Isvara and Jiva. is due to the conditioning associate of Jiva (in the shape of the body and senses). . The analogy of the pot-ether.:\NjI~. How omnipotent ISvara with Jiva ? This objection Sankara says :- the possibility of His being who is transmigrating in the can there be identity of the an individual creature like the does not hold water.qlctllO( (0f (0f ?~ ~! I 3i1Cf)1!i1't!e:ICflI~I.qe:O!{q'QI{:. pitchers etc.i~~nsfi1 ~: ~~ "3"~~ ~~cj\J1lql'4Cfl: I Cfiti - illustration of the simultaneous unity of Atrnan as well . ~ 'qqfu I flG«1:. may be justified on the analogy of ether in general and a pot-ether. their conditioning associates in empirical lite. as '(1~l1fB' -::r. given as an This sloka is given in illustration of how Paramatman appears to be born as many jivas and .. But when the absolute unity of Atman is intuited in the light of the teaching in such text as ' That thou ali'.9. ~: ? ~.T '(1 'tCll1fB' ~~cj"1I(11. and yet the unity of Atrnan remains intact. ~: ift. AND ETHER IN GENERAL 50.'1 (fGT ~ 31i:le:f'"i~~l<i a1~: ~=8lf{(i3j ~~Ol~:q ~mit ('!~('q'{ 'qqfu.qI~'1 wtl ~ q(':t Cfi I ilf< c?! Pc:: C1 : !'l fd tij Ifq d ~ I C( I 3ifil -:q "lR. without affecting his absolute monistic nature. (2) pots as conditioning adjuncts of pot-ethers. sn.. there is neither the creator nor the transmigratory Jiva different from each other. CfiT.. ~-~-~~.

aand that in the teaching about Brahman in Vedanta. according to Sankara. 51. This avidya. 'qT.ll(''i ~:(f.".qfC\~lIq~ OJ 1- W fq(i>\q 1f~ra-uT Evidently Karma-kanda. 14ffqi.Q. wrong knowledge.rrr: *-~.ufClde. ~?f. -.. 31CJ. The Jiiiina-kiiTJ.70 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA RELATION BETWEEN KARMA-KANOA AND 71 (:}) If\"Ut tf~ ~ ~ II·flll'lliOj41{fy I II ~.. II CfI::nqlC::I'"i~jqf<~I{ltj ~. THE RELATION BETWEEN THE KARMA-KANDA AND THE JNANA-KANDA ----_ . is intended to show how this mutual superimposition of the Atman and the unreal not-self. that reason of the nature of believing in one's being an agent and experiencer of the fruits of action. to future births in this world and to the other world and restricts itself to reveal the means of attaining what one desires to attain there also. only to reveal the appropriate means of attaining what is liked and of warding off what is disliked. death. the means of rubbing off avidya the very root of desire. ~. 5. (~) l!d f. 3ql't1Sf{d8jql~ff1." Introduction. This verse illustrates how Atman remains the same in spite of the Vyavaharic conventions of birth.. by revealing the real nature of the Monistic Atman who is the only Reality Absolute.t on the other hand. "Karma-kanda was undertaken for the benefit of one who .." lntro Br. extends the range of the result of empirical life relating to the present birth. We have also seen (in para 47) how in the discussion of the epithet Prajfia ascribed to Isvara. does not confer any virtue upon the not-self and cannot taint the Atman either (~GtifuI ~ err3l'j41~uIIFq "l11" ~v. Tai . "Obligatory Karmas have been studied in the previous portion for wiping off sins accumulated in the past.C>if"'l tt tmtlll4ffil a:rrfl1T ~t?H1{4~~ ~: _~~H1{CfIt(CI1I 6 U j. and of warding off what is disliked.{la. As Sankara says: (~) ~ Chtifful. ill .1.IIRiqf{~til qillfa::il ~ If~: af£. a:ref.. One important distinction between the procedure of Vedic teaching adopted in the KarmakaQ. ¢!~fC\'tI1 sn."!Oj: ~tC[f"'l tt!>lIN ~ ~ ~'i{j II qR~N:"OJICfI!{UllO( 3'I1rl1lel ~lllO( (1ft.. should be steadily kept in mind in order to avoid misconceptions. as we have already seen (para 27).Wi J11{@tjq_ I ~ ('€t[. and Kamya Karmas also for the benefit of those that desire to attain fruits (of karmas). as the reader is aware.lf. But the reason of desiring to attain what is liked.::tI q~ t q . movement and staying in all the bodies. The illustration of the rope-snake which he often adduces.fl1l4Ifrl-:q IT"~ i~ believes that there is certainly an Atman. that reason viz. has not been removed by revealing one's opposite nature of being Brahmatman. in contrast to jiva on account of .l{q ill '" <:f1 I?I. ~. Bcf·~H. who is to be connected with another body and who is desirous of attaining what is desired and of warding off what is disliked in connection with that body.:q {I (1iii! t. <. ~«lll~ . is the superimposition of the unreal not-self on the real Self. CfiT.:rn-). proposes to reveal to the dispassionate souls.

'iCllillcH:g·llil'l<tj)G:I . Let us take. lest the two views be mixed up. accounts for his uniform tirade in almost all his Bhashyas against the Jnsfia-karma-sarnuchchaya-vada of certain Vedantins who either ignored the nature of the genuine knowledge of Brahman. would cease to be since the experiencing ego and the experienced objects would become identical. or confounded it with Upasana.$~sfq . There also Sankara writes '~(i:.. we reply this distinction can well remain intact. happens to sublate a previous false notion attached to it ." VS. as may be seen from illustrations in common life.] smr' ( R~ 'llT . for there is an illustration based on experience in common life :f114~leGCflI('q'il. does not affect Atman in the least.. 3-3-9. there would be a repugnant identification of both the experiencing ego and objects to be experienced. (~) 1{j2f51lq~<fCl'qjJl~~q_ {41R11CflqClII ~. • l{!. .f. keeps these two view-points wide apart throughout the Sankara-Mimamsa." SBh. Sailkara frequently draws our attention to this distinction. may be said to be mainly due to a misconception resulting from their inability to appreciate this distinction of the two vyavaharas... '. "If it should be objected that the distinction of the experiencer and the experienced. occurs when a subsequent idea faithful to the nature of an object.:. This distinction between the two portions of the Vedas.. when the false notion of the self attached to the aggregate of the body and the senses.jF15~r.. Badarayana as interpreted by Sankara. ~ . Criticisms of Sankara by adverse Bhashyakaras of Vedanta-Sutras.P~I (. this subsequent idea being born out of the teaching '1113.s:CfllzYl ij< q 114 Cfll zYl 'q ""Cf«l'1: Cfl!Ti:!fG iii:. steadily kept in view throughout Sankara's exposition of Vedic-vyavahara. 331. the following two Siitras discussing the consistency of the definition of Brahman as the cause of the universe :.. for instance. ~-~-~. Here the objection is that since the universe is an effect of the primary cause Brahman.'5.(-~-~~.72 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA HOW SANKARA'S VEDANTA IS MISUNDERSTOOD 73 this superimposition or avidya. The reply is that the distinction may still be kept up even on the advaitins view. is removed by the correct notion of Atman belonging to the genuine Atman himlself. 52. Sailkara writes' : ~ 1fli ~ HOW SANKARA'S VEDANTA TO BE MISUNDERSTOOD OTHER VEDANTINS HAPPENS BY CflR1lf¥~!1'k1f-i ~ qcff.. ~~~. as for example.. 2-1-13 "Apavada or rescission in the case of apposition.3 dftiCflI{1 ali q.' Elsewhere.. ~. II vn. ~'i'5...j"m~'I:ZfT RCiflld "B..:Jfqt<: I~ i '" m~ ~ q~=q!'?!fCj'""ll1 '(jft:P::!ffl' ~~. ~ .t thou art'. according to the Advaitin. e.) • ~ 'Just as there is no change in the nature of rope either at the time of one's falsely believing it to be a snake or when one's delusion bas been dispersed.

but that upasana is the only Vidya that is capable of destroying avidya. a wavelet. may well be distinct from each other even while they are each one with Brahman as the material cause. simply because verbs derived from both the roots Icrs:. . ~ ~- en~ 1 3l!>l Cl! 1&i I~ q Cfl 14!>l q::. At the close of this Bhashya Saitkara writes {1i1Cf1I~:sf11 on this Siitra ~ ~ '" 'WIT~ffi:H'II~ 01 'dG'1O<1cqli_' ~ '~ct1)q)qc( ~ J:jtIBS~f'4l1t'11di ~: . experience. This doctrine is the outcome of a double misconception. d (HFtid~d{t:j IClH Iq1iI'6jfq (1S~I\14 o:ftS'1 0<164 <qqfu II The Advaitin' s reply IS "Foam.nS'1 ~1a:1 qF-a$fu i '. he says that such a distinction is possible as we see that it obtains in the world. and that the distinction of pramatru. while they are one with the sea as water. some have made bold to doubt that very Reality. has no support of an5'i. 2-1-14. So also. 1?CPt feMrT: '"tRl1T~sffif' .. he adopts the method of parinama (evolution) also. "The author of the Sutras also says there is nondifference in view of the Paramartha (Transcendental Reality). the next Stltra has abandoned this view.' SBh. This reply is from the view-point of vyavahara." SBh. Sailkara accordingly explains it thus :3lt:qqllU1.. but this distinction is not really real.::cj qf{OIl $OOj!>l FSfl'11 i j -:qrw::rfu 'VV9 -:q (1~S:J5<6flI\14 0<1~sfq .. and none of the effects is identical with another. Some Schools of Vedanta have not only insisted that Srutis present Brahman only as the object of Upasana. 9 9V 00. pramana and pramey_a. '1(1{:S:.f ~ (1F~Cf'l1{I 01 i q. 441." SBh. hut from the higher view of Paramartha..\'1\1 . so that it might be usefully employed in the interpretation of Upasanas. In the first place. 432. 433.~ Not realizing that Badarayana takes his stand on the axiom that Brahman or the Universal Self is self-established Truth and Reality in one. (vid) and ~ "Conceding this empirical distinction of the experiencer and the experienced. a wave.pramana CAN UPASANA DO AWAY WITH A VIDYA ? 53.-. they have rushed to the conclusion of the mutual identity of jnana and up as ana. $d{ft{fi~H41Fc::<"l~ SANKARA cljqtl{: CAN UPAsANA DO AWAY WITH AVIDYA ? 75 ~'P:ffi . a bubble etc._l II Gl '"i Ii{ fPpJ!t:jqlB~4~ ~r02r ..0.s II ~ ex ~I~l = "1: 'I'l'T "li. 2-1-14. are distinct from one another. the experiencer. 2-1-13. it has been said that this distinction may well be maintained as it is seen in the world . alleging that the Brahman without specific features. And without negating the world of effects at all. and the experienced objects. Having the empirical view in mind.-. however. for there is really non-difference between the two. ~ ~ ClJIa:~If{41 ~~~ fq\Wi 'flll·ffl6fl- ere( ~ qR~l'il:sf~: .74 ~ MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT ~('I~("pfq'q)Tf:. is itself nourished by the light of that Pure Consciousness.

in so far as it is the result of a pramana which has some existent thing for its object.Jf""ldrCl~I~'"I ~ I d5Q~~I~lcd: Cfc:~1l1lR "if 3"lfq81q'lt1QQ f""lClMt1i ~fgrqEFIIII ~.{. is always in conformity with the nature of its object.::qw en aJ04fciV. Strictly speaking.flU~ChC'ClrqiilI41 fef~ ~.. has got to be acquired through the .I14141~1~11 ft ~ {1ftiCllJIS- :i'd5I!j'dltclfcrflt1lsffif i~ f-i(i)Ch{6:Q('qIC( I ~ .. Here we are reminded that. (~) ~m '~~. and has cited two passages '" (Ch 2-1-4.'l-l1. ~ ~ {itHl~tQ. And unlike upasana.:~"'i:f !>llc. '3{I("~~~ ~'. . But he would not fall a prey to the temptation of conceiving that avidya also could be destroyed by Upasana. JPTIUi -. Here we are reminded that the Sastra or Upanishad is only jiJifpiika (revealer) but not Kiimk» (creator) and so no authority of Sastra Can be invoked to prove that knowledge actually does effect something.f1q~~l>. ~~~. 3-18-1) as vouchers for this. presumes that there is Avidya or superimposition on Brahman in life.. mtm: ~.f>01 wWTt ~ (~) ~ ft ~ 1 Cf)Hetll{~ ~. even jfiana cannot be said to destroy avidya in the literal sense of the word.f -g~e::.{-'6-.:> ~lllld~<:j~. but it Here we learn that a person is the same Brahman even before he gets final release.'ldlfd ~.:j .. it is dependent neither on a person's will nor on any injunction.3i~&lcql{ fcr8r~ ~tlf-. Yet the knowledge of this fact. Sankara also recognizes this circumstance when he says fq~ q{~~:t-q ~ can never actually remove an existing property of a thing or create some property afresh. 31fcrnT'l_. 1. ann ~ "hcfq~letql{ ~t ~ q«1 ct. in all cases.q ~ I <hdll<ti4q.".. II ~~~. for (~)1w~m~~~·~~CfT~~ ~ Here we are told that the . but as common sense tells us. real jfiana is something quite different from Upasana.:.::) Rq ".76 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA HOW DOES mANA DESTROY AVIDYA ? 77 (upas) have been interchanged in certain texts enjommg Upasana (meditation). vidya (knowledge) is seen to remove ignorance only.. . '111~~~ ~. (~"IT I'l GI 01 Gl.~ IIll.mHIl{_. HOW DOES JNANA DESTROY AVIDYA ? 54. ~-'6-~o. '~adqR8 3f%l' . ('6) m~ ~<111rqq F.r~ ~ ~ I~ ~ .q.~31rcn~:{Ilm:ct~· f.rq0E1~ tRmr~Ch<:jMI'"IqqF"d: .{o. ery fact that the holy v revelation emphasizes that Brahman.. for according to his tradition. or Atman as Pure Being is the AU..

should Atman at these two stages.'("Cjlqq~~'tI I <lB1 :qlfctEJI~ II ~fwCfjljPHHi {it{j~Cfl(\3jdlO"lf('"FH:qlfG\qi:!:~4: ~:q-r.I Cflajl 41'lBf"'lqict\Jlf::hi. From the transcendental point of view. one is dissolved in Brahman through knowledge". '6'-~-~) 'One becomes a god and merges in gods'.. One seems to think and act 'as it were' . (b) fqr::P.. ~ ~ 31fClElIR2ji3!lf-iqff1'1iCfl ~ ~: . ~ ~ 1lf'cr?lT~ ~. cannot be surely treated as being actually ignorant of himself. and so one is not really ignorant This can be readily seen when it is observed that this wrong knowledge (avidya) so called is the result of the many functions of the body) senses and the mind. '6-'6-G.) ~ PlfJ:l{lfdfA(iiRClct_ fc:. therefore. (e. . and therefore that the removal of avidya.rNANA DESTROY AVIDYA ? 79 teaching of the Sastra . It is therefore surely wrong to think that the knower is the locus of this object. Ignorance is seen to appear and disappear . barren soil. Avidya. tR. is purely a device used for the purpose of rescinding some other teaching which tentatively grants the existence of avidya. ~~'6.ql 'Cit I 31fcr8T'iJIW'l ~ .] Here is another reason which serves as a clincher. on account of the removal or non .rirq: msfct ~ ~ ~. in the same way as there is nothing new happening in the actual nature of a rope. or dirty surface. and does not really pertain to Atman.f 'Ujlll(11Cl. mirage water. is only from the empirical standpoint.:q"1lfCltF1("CjI~qlllO"lRl I ~~C'l'Iq"'iilllO"lII likening it to dream-knowledge. while in the case of meditation it says '~ ~ ~6111c2\rd' ("!... 'm. so it is an object of knowledge. '6-'6 . in the same way as one who perceives an object. 3=[~ B<.. nacre and sky when the wrong knowledge treating them as a snake.f1(f('CIICfl1(q'tl(1: . and the enquirer has to make an effort to remove it ('"") ~ -~ 3ifC4tlldLct:. is removed. the Sruti says '. ~ '. [The theory of an actual birth of something undefinable (anirvachaniya) in these cases of misconception . ~~'6. One who sees avidya as an object. is quite foreign to Sailkara's tradition. only avidya has got to be removed. ~@c4fd' (. 3"lfc:ldI6fH:.J 3ifCltll<. has been to the S'ruti which negates the the difference of be admitted in met by appealing not-knowing by The above excerpts must suffice to show that the teaching of Final Release by the knowledge of Atman through the removal of avidya.removal of avidya. £jtlf~i*\ fqfq-ml '6-'6-G. "Being Brahman itself.114J1a:' Va ~~'6 • ElI6f11c:qt.r 78 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA HOW DOES .:£l II ~fdf~Q&(1:Ilct. '6'-'6'~). Here it is declared that there is no specific difference caused in the ignorant person.~ Here the objection that at least knowing and not-knowing. silver. 'm.

~(.Fc!4{ld~"Wr ~.."". (Br. 1-1-4) and partly to their instinctive allegiance to the efficacy of pramanas and.:> 3Rffil fcffiit ~ ~ ~ fcffiit -. 3-14-4. should be expected to lay down some injunction with or without Brahman as subservient to it.~. THE CENTRAL PHILOSOPHY OF SANKARA'S TRADITION OF VEDANTA 55. sn. l' dOlill"1lf=i <l~~Jjiflld&lQ ~ ~ - .~. in their ignoring the place of snubhevs. 'The purusa indeed.~:HI~' .tI~tI+4!{ ~~~ .. neither short nor long' 'Without sound. l4¥1q~. (. 1l~'tWfTf.~. 8-14-1). formless.l ~-~ -'6) ~I ~ ~f(jti3lfyd cHCf~-. ~-~~-~. may well be regarded as a veritable battle between a majority of Vedantic Schools who mostly maintained that the Upanishads being an integral part of the Vedas. '~~:~: t1~ ~ ijli1"1I'iql1"iq{q1"'7i{qql&jl:"I~ql\tll ~' (~. ~-~-~"'). I am going to become one with It after departing hence. 1J1tH'ilf1. "This is my Atman inside the heart. ern.80 ~ M1SCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA II 31R'l1TS~~c:~ ~ (jj@dfJOid: ~ml'l1P~dlflf1f(j I! CENTRAL PHILOSOPHY OF SANKARJ\'S TRADITION 81 -rn. Sankara's comment on the aphorism ~6j~qg~a.. ~.. 'fa:F. The reason why the later Vedantins following the subcommcnraries.. . The history of the vicissitudes of Vedantic thought.r onr~ 3fC1""OfqR'R1l dict14if8 ~ FClf. without touch.:r I ~ .:. ~. which is known as Masa (Ether).Pltl1111i %q:. 'That indeed.*rlI':PiIGIR ~ ~ tJ>c!&.\1'1. ~. Following in the footsteps of Gaudapada. that which is distinct from these two.Z.)." Ch. what is more. and the Bhashyakaras of other systems.l':ffQdl . is transcendental. . Sankara interprets Badarayana as fully endorsing the main doctrines of the followers of this latter school..>! 4:s:t:1(jj$lIC'JOj=cq'~{4q~ql( ("~. llC:. without colour.+ Tiltl~q41f. that is Brahman' (Ch. ~-~-~~. (intuition) and snubheviinussri tarksh (reasoning in consonance with intuition) adopted in the Upanishads. (~.. 3ql'8Tilfc~fC!ft:nT'tlI1If'""l I~ . tp:. ~ ~-~-~¥) deserves pointed attention in this connection :. ~". fu QO['iHfGlf( (~. ~. and a minority of Vedantins who stood by assertive texts which seem to proclaim that the knowledge of Brahman leads a seeker to the highest goal of life independently of any religious duty to be performed whether in conjunction with such knowledge or even exclusively. failed to see eye to eye with Sankara lies partly in their want of attention to the line of argument adopted in Sankara's elaborate commentary on the Samanvaya SiJtra (VS.ljllt{' (cnT.-~¥-~).~~) . undecaying' (Ka.j!i:1l4~S I $d{lfbl cHCf""1lf'""l Fit).~ 0 fu ~ {!'ff.! <l~~ F'""I{!<:flI{ilC! 3fCI~ I'(f£jflOlj t{ fClIChI{ClG:_41&1Fw'll'llFUI q I CfqIf<i. ~ ~ II ~ ~ aHICflI{~q ~ 3iCf~. is that which differentiates name and form . '~ . ~-~-~). 1-3-15). 'It is neither gross nor subtle..P4'1oq&fClli<:il'-1""\ "~frr' (~. s-z-z). this is Brahman. \1'-.

2-1-2). 1-1-4). Brahman has to be accepted and taken to be. ~-~¥-o. this principle has to be observed in deciding our choice. is dissolved and moves in Brahman'.::rr 'ljfd~~ ~ (~. there are Srutis teaching that those that meditate upon Brahman. That is why Brahman is concluded to be without any specific feature and not otherwise. that is. that texts having it as their main purport are preferable to those that have it not. tIT. em. ~-~-~. c. "" 1f. So their express teaching (about) Brahman. Again.such Srutis for instance as teach that Brahman has four quarters ('i:lrt&ll<i). unborn both within and without' (Mu. 281. Compare for instance '~lr~fjk·ilqH"fh1' (GJ. this Atman intuiting everything. is Brahman' (Br. ¥-¥-~o Knowing Him alone.rNANA . and also there are Srutis describing Brahman as possessing various forms . Therefore in texts of this kind. The €trutis themselves use verbs derived from the roots 'upiis~and 'viti' indiscriminately to indicate '"tR) ~~(4qIBl(1' (~. ~o~.rr d4fifFf(1 HOW THE MAJORITY OF VEDANTIC SCHOOLS HAPPENED TO MISS THE IMPORTANCE OF JNANA . 3-2-14. '~~~' ('if. 'All this is verily Brahman for it is born.. 2-5-19) . are taken by a divine guide to Brahman.~c-~) WI " "B.ft~ -3i64F(i<~or ~ aqs:flD:! :aqlf«HI dqfjQ{f<1 I 1l~ ~ ~ I~ fcm. and all the three . and there are extracts which begin with verbs derived from one of the roots 'viti: or ~upiis' and close with the other form to denote one and the same meditation as Sankara has himself pointed out :FqtiQIR'. even while there are texts teaching both (form and no form). viz. ¥-~-~) ~ (~. 1l~ '311 11 ~ ~ wrcrr ~ ~-~l-~) ~ "ff q~ct:Sib:' ~q\1lJ4q. of the very nature as revealed in these. 'Now this Brahman is without anything antecedent." SBh. should be accepted only in so far as there is no clash (between the two teachings) . the discriminating one should try to get perfect consciousness' and 'lfCf ~ ~ ct\NjC1lf"lfa ~~.fil' ~ I W'tl"liT ''iilfo 'g-~-~) ~ I EfiF·ifcil aqlffHI aq¢flt:tq fqfe:.jl!i'q ~~I. 'But it has really the Sastra alone for its source' (VS. these do not mainly purport to teach that (the real nature of Brahman). and without anything consequent. and nothing else. As for the other set of sentences. but when there is any clash (with the other set of teachings. as being emphatically without specific features.82 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SA}''KARA HOW VEDANTIC SCHOOLS MISS . ~¥-~). 'One should think upon Him as Atman exclusively'.TEXTS 56. teaching Brahman with specific features.. sixteen discs (~ls~ICflC1I:). It is easy to guess why so many interpreters have been misled to lay emphasis on the Upasana texts in preference to those that exclusively teach jfiana. it has been conclusively shown in the Siltra 'Tat tu samanvayat".TEXTS 83 He is verily. ~. for their aim chiefly is to enjoin upasana. both meditation and knowledge and there are texts recommending knowledge which may be mistaken for injunctions. without anything interior or without anything exterior .texts like these mainly purporting to teach the absolute nature of Brahman without manifoldness.ffiTI ~jiHiOjq~ '"if tfftrn 'G ~ il<i 1l "Q!-f ~' ern.

is uniformly the one subject . associates. 11-2) and declares that this is the only cause unifo~ly taught in all the Upanishads. AU these circumstances.84 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA WHY BADARAYA~A TAKE PAINS TO RECONCILE 85 worlds for its body (~. however. In the immediately succeeding sentences.14fqtj~ur fcPII~'i CflH:014Fq ~ tlc. For he proclaims that Brahman taught as the cause. first gives the definition of Brahman. One more seeming riddle to be solved in BadaraYaIJ-a'swork.has been maintained by many a pre-Satikara Vedantins. S. he takes up for discussion certain passages which are seemingly in conflict with one another as regards the nature of the cause as well as the order of creation of the effects such as the ether (Akasa).matter undertaken to be taught here. Here. may be noted here before we close this section. and not the non-sentient Pradhana (primordial seed of matter) or the Paramat)US (atoms) .1Cf. After showing by means of typical examples how this uniformity is observed. according to Sankara.rHiDv:!) all of which might be explained as due to Brahtnan' s super . there is to be found some disharmony about the creation of the effect . But merely because of the divergence regarding the effects. no l~ss than the later Bhashyakaras inbued with ideas relating to karma yielding results mostly in another world. as 'the cause of the origination. While explaining the meaning of the Sutras.*. " SBh.." The Stitra above cited unequivocally points to the only tradition with which Badarayana sides. white the effects serve the one purpose of leading the enquirer to that cause. WHY DOES BADARAY~A TAKE PAINS TO RECONCILE SRUTIS TEACHING CREATION? 57.matter in al1 the Upanishads. 1:4-14. or as conceivable. is not proposed to be seriously taught here. is not their import intended.f~~I~tqfcpndLlr~- "True. he adds :"There may well be divergence regarding the effects for they are not the real subject . as . evidently. BadarayaQa. the Bhashya grants for arguments' sake that there is disharmony in the teaching concerning the effects... when they jumped to the conclusion that jfiana (knowing) referred to in the Vedas must be some species of religious mental duty enjoined. Sankara writes :~ -:q . 367. may have weighed with the ancient Vrttildiras.inferred by the Sarpkhyas and Vaiseshikas. for it can be readily seen that they form one whole along with texts teaching the nature of Brahman. as promised by the Sruti . Sankara has adduced the Mimamsic principle of interpretation . it is easy to conjecture. sustentation and dissolution of this universe' (V. There is no purpose seen to be served by it.normal powers or to conditioning. it cannot be that even Brahman uniformly known to be the cause from all the Upanishads. (To explain :) This detail of creation etc..

~~\3. 2-1. 'But the question is.q: ~ promised in Srutis like Tai. is the one that is to be considered as the principal teaching. as pointed out by Sankara. iron sparks. which both Badarayana and Sai1kara have steadily kept in view.6tilsfdii<::!i4fct' (w. if. 16). (see para. Really there is." SBh. why should Badarayana take pains to reconcile apparent disharmony among Srutis teaching creation. are taught in the Sruti. should be considered as subservient to it). It is only from the paramarthic standpoint that Sankara refuses to assign the same value to the texts teaching creation as he attaches to texts teaching the real nature of Brahman. say 'TQe creation that is taught in diverse ways with illustrations like those of clay.:fiT.dls.q Cfl14~ ttll{VJ11iR ~ ~~lf~!IIq-:l-. 3-8. 6-14) proclaiming that the universe as an effect of its cause Brahman. creation is not something seriously intended to be taught in the Srutis ? This objection forgets the distinction between psremiirths (transcendental Reality) and Vyavahifra (practical life). Moreover the benefit of this knowledge. II' that teaching creation etc. but also from a text (Ch. ~-'6-~'6. '(f{fu }(nCfll1!("l1fqq_' ern. is directly intuited also. 7-1-3 and S've.WHY BADARAYANA 86 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA TAKE PAINS TO RECONCILE 87 'heC!ffif'1m ~ ct(§~Il{_ (The Sruti which promises some good result to the knower of what is taught.:yp:f~) as is seen in common life in aU instances of material causes and their effects (lif-d41c=ltq~). would do well to remind themselves repeatedly what he has definitely declared about the standard of reality with regard to all vyavaharas : Wi I ~&Hlfdqf-d~fa<Slo& TI ~ ~-~).:yp:f~ Iifil41fD:~ ~).C{tCl~~. Otherwise. 367. on the other hand: the fruit accruing from the knowledge of Brahman."n. "Besides. no difference whatever' (GK.::!I~: mSCidl{llf ~ ~: ~ tfRqf Tfift. Critics of Sankara's technique. 0. a mere play of words (~"qi]f ~ -. 'qT.14Rr~). ~ ~ '~~fq('W"i--lfct \9-~-~). as Salikara avers. only to reveal the non-difference of the effect from the Cause with the aid of illustrative examples like the day. he keeps all distinctions of practical life quite intact. ~ '(fitq II fClft. has no other purport than this clarification of the absolute unity of Brahmatman. 1-4-14. we can easily see that the details of creation etc. thus demonstrating that Sruti emphasizes the exclusive reality of the causes. s-z) Wl I ~~ 'B.:. The Acharya not only refers to the Sruti (~~ -. is only a means to introduce the listener to the right teaching. The Sruti. It is evident that Sankara is anxious to emphasize Wi ~ I Cfm -:q {j~C::I"1fc1~ CRRt . is in itself unreal. and that this is the only conclusion to be drawn not only from their express declaration that this is so.'iim1~fqf1lfc. . ~-~"") ~ (~. There is. while the one that is taught without such ·a promise. And that is what those conversant with the tradition.qm I ~: (-m:. but also appeals to the traditiona1 teaching when he wr tes :'j1~Jft. expressly recommends that the effects should be taken only as the means to ascertain the Cause (~N ~~ B4:_<. 3-15). Ch.

. 2-3-19 . 36). 2-1-34. "In the different Upanishads. 2-3-1.. it may be suspected that our case too should be discarded on tills very ground of inconsistency . 'qT.53) of the Jiva ..rtflref ~ .. II 'qT. transformation into the universe (VS. 2-3-33 .11Cflfll II ~ ~ ~: ~ I I "1 ~ Chf<qf-qC( -qr:f "1 ~ ~ . there is found to be disharmony with regard to the order and other matters touching creation in the other Upanishads." SBh.q&. All these are to be justified in the strictly non dualism of Sankara. Bcf&JCl61{1<qp:f ~~: Ch'""lffu.. Omnipotence (VS. the detailed discussion in the sequel is begun to show how the teaching of Srutis with regard to creation.. Sankara writes in his introduction to the section on the discussion of consistency in Vedantic teaching concerning creation as follows :B cf04QI3I{1 ijll~c( Ict_ flC'<1 rc?t qq~ : mrr.] (~) ~ {f~tHlfld'fClf1:l Ch4lfiMt1lj'pj ~~ 'WIT~ '".. It has been concluded that other systems are to be discarded on account of inconsistency. 35. Questions about (1) the birth (VS.41{i('qri:1q'ti'iRf. ~-~-~){. 31). In the same way.88 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA IMPORTANCE OF DISCUSSIDN 89 'All conventions of practical life. is free from all defects.q'"lRi. some mention the origination of air (vayu). ~~ ~~. 2-1-14). Accordingly.. 33).. 18). 88. And so. -.1~qtiMEJ'\14cil qrri:1qfl.40).~H THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DISCUSSION ABOUT iSVARA AND JIv A 58.. obtains.f f~ ~ ~~: ~ ~~ I d(tlfl'1Q. 2-1-32. and (2) God's want of precaution in creating the universe (VS... 2-~-21 to 23).o. motive in creating the world (VS. ¢fj1-lIfG[. ~-~-~. So also with regard to the individual selves Glvas) and priIpas (vital force and the organs). dependency on Isvara (VS. while other texts do not. ){~o. there are to be found texts dealing with creation with different approaches (to the SUbject). ~ II I ~ ~~ ~: B tf~t.l '"'dIOfjlfct*iR~ am:'Rffi '" 'B. may consistently continue to be real before the intuition of the nature of Brahmatman' (SBh. and partiality and mercilessness (VS. when we remember what he has said with regard to the relation of Isvara and Jiva in Vedanta :(~) i. 2-3-17. 2-1-26). 2-3-43 . while others do not .f ~ -. <. likewise.32). 25). GflCjf!l I I {fm ~f. Thus some mention the origination of ether (8kasa). 2-1-30.!'ifll\4fd.. cc. 2-1-24. [It is only owing to the conditioning associate projected by avidya that the convention of the Ruler and the ruled.Rcnlsftr fClqf(1~'tT: "tT{ll~. agency (VS. ~ (4cf:{. The same is the case with regard to the lengthy discussion concerning Jiva and Isvara. c.oIlLl'iqf~ ~~(1fflq':i!'6:. creation without the needful materials (VS. so.Cf~d lIT: ~: >fT1JfRt ~ I ~ fcl!>lf(1~~ FC!qfct~~ ~('lI"f1{t:lqt1~ ~ e. (4q~c4. the size (VS..(i~ ~ itifqG'Cfl\~tf!l ~ I~ (Bf d. 11"tlTI~ tR!tilf~'d&1(4cf~('ClIF~6lICj~I{: fcm!rr 3iq'«1(4c{Jqtf~ d q q€ld ~.ij~I~~ Ct~.

the Ruler of all from the vyavaharic standpoint.] This should convince anyone who surveys Badarayana's work as a whole as to how he grants the reality of all the empirical distinctions of objective phenomena. even while he maintains the sale reality of Brahman from the transcendental point of view. "B. 42L &lq61<lq~~: e-. and consequently disparages karmas and upasanas prescribed in the Sastras.f~~~ e-.i ~ ~m ~ I o'Hk4l@!'1laq "B.. 91 iR ~~: II' (7ft.llf ~ o. ~-~-~'6. at the level of vyavahara. CjifjOll~Cl~lqlOlrdql~'iq{0=iI:cq - ~~('j~M ~ fClB1ddll{ II "B. it-'8{lndlfClM lI. as proclaimed by him (in siitra 2-1-14) according to Sankara. ~t-GO B~ChF?lsf1:r ~ ~ es." SBh. MEANS TO JNANA AND MUKTI Even while dealing with empirical distinctions of Isvara and Jiva.&lCl61<: '~~-m: c'.. OIfClElIChf?qd'"llli~qoqq~I{- 'n:q{(€IIct:. Sankara is careful enough to warn the reader against confounding them with the transcendentally real . Just as the empirical distinction of the real and the unreal and that of truth and error. has been kept intact while teaching transcendental Reality and Truth in Badarayana's work according to Sankara. ~-~-~~. has a predilection for sanyasa.:. so. are negated in the Upanishads and the Bhagavadgita. '6~~. ~: '" c. are labouring under an unpardonable misconception. Karma and Upasana have been assigned their own legitimate place in the empirical sphere.. and questions like creation. teach the distinction of Isvara and Jiva. [From the transcendental standpoint all conventions of the distinction of Isvara and Jiva. therefore. the fourth order of the life of a twice-born person. this Sruti teaching creation does not relate to 59.'.:qltt'11Cflctc( I oqct61{lf~ ~ -mr 1OI~1B5s::ftlHl'4t1i -:q[~ 9: II '6"t~. C. 'l1T. absolute Reatily. o.wr:rr ~ (1ft. Evidently. like those of individual souls and Brahman as !svara..'i~('ql{' "BCf~ '" -r. This too should never be forgotten.] (~) "Q.flHlqB~' j~-'8\: ~~ II' ~'Q. '6~S~ I '6-~~) fd~fd ~ I~ I (f~ . 'i1T. c. That . ChI4~q3iEj qf{0lllilOlfSifi'4i fPjl]P~qIB~t. •'Besides.lTI~ ~~:.90 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA 3iiill~'"lI'id ~ MEANS TO rNANA AND MUKTI ~-~'6. It is therefore either prejudice or some misconception which has led some critics to believe that this Acharya. 'i1T. [These extracts show that the Srutis no less than the Gita and Badarayana's Siitras.. critics who charge Sankara with predilection for Miiyiivada~ the doctrine of believing in the illusory nature of all empirical distinctions.f ~ 1p. 2-1-33. c. ~-~-~'6. for it only refers to the convention of name and form conjured up by avidya and purports mainly to teach the nature of Brahmatman.::::II~~IPI '(I.1<. ~ '" '" ~-'iHlrG. ~~) '6'6~. c. that it may be useful for the treatment of Upasanas.

. because of the 8mti teaching yajfijj (sacrifice) etc. r1G~r"iJ{_I "l{~ -.& m.. Badarayana draws our attention to the fact that Vidya (knowledge of Brahman) is seen to be taught to aspirants in asramas other than that of the house-holders. is perhaps due to the prevalence of schools which subscribed to that doctrine during Badarayana's time.f rChr:. 3-4-1 to 17) has been devoted to the discussion of the Jfijjnakanna-S8fllUchchaya-viida (the doctrine insisting that the combined practice of jfiana and kaI111a was compulsory for aspirants of fmal Release).~ (And that is why there is no need of sacrificial fire and fuel etc.r ~ fq{l"Fy~ ~ . ~~. That a portion of the fourth pada of the third chapter (VS. . to have convincingly explained how the main purport of the Upanishads. 'And there is need of all these. Sankara explains the meaning of the second aphorism as follows :- m-~: . that 0' ~ ~~ I rrarr 3IT~l1Chl1ffUlfcrwrr lh!?lfui\ "-'~. a:rtr~ ~ II . the question of the fourth order of life (sanyasa) for discussion..~ ~ fcrnr ~ 0' ~ 1". a:rtr~ I ~. and '~8.92 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA LEGITIMATE PLACE OF KARMA AND UPASANA 93 Badarayana and Sankara. is subsequently discussed by the author of Sarrraka.q Vedantic knowledge in leading to Final Release... as we have already seen. CRITICISM COMBINED OF THE DOCTRINE OF PRACTICE OF KARMA AND JNANA Badarayana as interpreted by Sankara brings in. whether on the Upanishads.q lfll£l(1lcri1'i 31m ~ C11:s·qZ1"?h~i1)~. 3-4-25). and up to the time of Sankara.VS. actually regard both Karmas and Upasanas as worthy of consideration as Jfiana itself.~S~Gq~J I . It is only to demonstrate the exclusive efficacy of AND UPASANA AS MEANS LIBERATION 61. 3-4-26).. There are two Siltras on this subject: '3ffi ~ ~8... would be evident to anyone who takes the trouble of studying the large portion of the Vedanta Siitras devoted to both these from the third pada of the third chapter of the Sariraka up to the close of that work.". "\lq'=Flflli ~-.. Whether Final Release desiderates Karma and Upasanas at all in any way. and as such it cannot be consistently expected to be combined with karma. The refutation of this doctrine. SaDkara's main contribution to Vedanta is. is the knowledge of Brahman as the only means leading to the intuition of eternal freedom of Atman from samsara... In the Surra 3-4-17.TI II' ~-'lI'-.. a:rtr~ ~ ~~qCf)qffUl fcrrn ~~ ~ ~ I lfi(:'"lfflF. ~ ? ~~: '31JJ:I'd'"rl'Wl ~"'Ia'ldl'" ~'\. is to be found invariably in almost all Bhashyas ascribed to Sankara. THE LEGITIMATE PLACE OF KARMA TO 60. as in the case of a horse' (VS. the Bhagavadgita or the VedanteSutras.TI 'if ~~~ II' ~-'lI'-~G.. .

Just as a horse is not employed for drawing a plough. for the origination of knowledge. when performed without any desire for the enjoyment of This siitra according to Sankara'.qclL(1 ~ lI~l.:l II )!-~-1. To the objection that immortality being the . but it does desiderate (these rites) for its own production. viz. it has been explained at length. It must be noted.. should be resorted according to the stage of life (of the seeker). ¥\9~. how sacrifices etc...::_lF"1:t1"lt:AIc. but is employed for the purpose of driving a carriage in view of its fitness. 4-2-7. 62. for they have been enjoined in connection with vidya (knowledge) in the text beginning '(tasmat evsmvit)' (Br.qp_r 4"iM"'IjNcllf~ lj~IG1f. And as between these two sets of means.9.94 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA MOKSHA IN CASE OF MEDITATOR AND JNANIN 95 "(Objection :-) Surely. who uniformly believe that Final Release itself is to be attained through Upasana alone :l!l1AT ill*!~q5flJ4IG'Fl(':j illj4 l&. their fruits. he expressly says that the directly immediate means of knowledge.9. while he insists that karmas are necessary for the production of Vidya.". whereas sacrifice and other means have been enjoined in connection with vividishii (desire to know) in the text 'tsmeuun vediinuvucbenena brlihmanii vividishsati yajiiena' (Br.lf<i. so also.. SOIfl1R!~If". 469. are only selfcontrol (sarna) and other psychic items of discipline :~fot:qfq . 3-4-27. For.. Therefore. 3-4-26.. j ~. 'S:I~~f'ifll'tRlR "q "iCl. es. become means for the attainment of knowledge." SBh. 471. 4-4-23). "And the process of departure.JJfd SOIQy=.lf"i aNf&1004IR -q?:lT~ {"iClfu~cm>I"ICfi14fFUI fClt5l~=dl 'q:4FCln: Fqfc:\f~tiilti ~ fqEllti~llll<t. are not needed for yielding the fruits of knowledge while they are needed for manifesting knowledge. Brahmopasana. ~-)!-~1. says..)" SBh. this is self-contradictory that knowledge desiderates and yet does not desiderate the karmas of the (house-holder's) Asrama ! (Reply :-) We say 'this is not so'. is common (to both) up to the beginning of the path and the immortality is one without burning up (ignorance etc. fcH:Jml~ lfJl11 ~ iSllt!)o{lful ~=ilIG1F'"i~ fCl~ "d5C4"l II tI. must be distinguished from what a majority of other schools of Vedanta. 4-4-22). that control of the mind. knowledge which has dawned. the karmas of the householder's asrarna. the meditator takes to the path of the gods and proceeds to -Brahrnaloka to get Amrtatva (immortality or release). a distinction should be observed. that while the mode of graduated departure of the meditator is the same as that in the case of ordinary persons. 'ij"f. according to Sankara' s tradition with regard to the result of.llq~JfloI8F§ MOKSHA IN THE CASE OF THE MEDITATOR AND OF THE JNANIN 63. does not desiderate anything else for producing its result. «Not only in the Srutis. that Sankara gives no quarter to the doctrines of the combined practice of karma and knowledge for attaining release. are remote. Badarayana' s position. both Yajfia etc. but also in Smrtis like the Bhagavadgita. The expression 'As in the case of a horse' illustrates fitness. and other means are more proximate. For. " SBh. and self-control etc. however.:' I~ ~141e.

~. there cannot be any occasion for him to stay in the 'bhiitas' along with tejas. in the Bhashya on this Stltra that in view of this passage commencing with 'artll"h111441'1:' (and now the one who is devoid of all desires) in contrast to the ignorant person whose departure and going to the other world have been already described cannot be reasonably twisted to mean that even the desireless wise person has to undergo departure from the body and goes to some place which he has already achieved. The use of the words Yoga and Dhyiuu: by Sankara and Badarayana.t'. W~ need 110t suppose that his life .YOGA we should apply the word it's (GBf) to the 64. the meaning is that all those pranas accompany him when he departs.1 murr 3ffi114Ri' ('his vital airs do not go out' Hr. demolishes this supposition by quoting a parallel passage (Br. that there are Srutis like 'm ~ ~' he attains Brahman here alone' (Ka 6-14) which expressly declare that there is no need for any movement or departure from the body in the case of the wise one. has led some writers on Vedanta. 3-2-11) from the same Upanishad wherein all the pranas are said to dissolve themselves in this very body and :in consideration of this express statement it is but right that even in the text which has the reading I'. and so there is nothing repugnant here.j" (W. however. il&. 4-4-6).forces do not depart from his body merely because the text says ''. Badarayana himself has refuted the logic of the Nirisvara Samkhya of Kapila (VS.j(C( II "6-~-~~. 2-1-3) Sankara expressly warns the students of Vedanta against identifying Vedic Samkhya and Yoga with what is denoted by those words in the systems of Kapila and Patanjali. Another Siltra rules out the possibility of any departure of the life-forces in the case of the genuine knower of Brahman. Sankara adds. he points out. 2-2-1 to 2-2-10) .f ~ murr 3ffi114Ri I' thereby clearly saying that the pranas.f (W. Moreover.96 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA ADHYATMA-YOGA 97 goal of the knower of Brahman. to confound these items of discipline with those used in Patanjali's system. In his Bhashya (on VS. Badarayana here replies that this immortality is only relative and not the genuine Release to be attained when all avidya is burnt up. reads ''. ADHYATMA . As a matter of fact there is no shred of evidence to support this surmise. do not part from the embodied one. In the previous Siltra the objection was brought forward that even in the case of actual knower of Brahman.1 murr 3ciifi!4Ri' body alone to which the negation is expected to apply and not to the embodied self as imagined by the advocates -of the Prima facie view. for this same text according to the Madhyandina version. or to resort to any 'path' to reach immortality. and so. Badarayana.

" SBh." SBh.6fl~t( ~ l'l&mfl. Sankara has the following observation to offer in this connection :t1clll£1fq 31'U!lrl1FCltjlll§ ~ f''HI2f}{~ ~: ~: 1.98 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA ADHYATMA . The Samkhyas and the yogas.:r(ICfl{ojTI'. 407._&114llll~f. than the discrimination of the Prakrti and Purusha taught by Kapila's Smrti and likewise. 'GT • ~ .g. knowing that Shining One . 2-1-3.. 407. and not seers of the Absolute Unity of Atman.'" practice of Yoga.!1isrelating to Atman. 2-12) and not to Kapila's Pradhana or to Patanjali's Ekagravrtti needed for Samadhi. for it says 'There is no other path to attainment than (this knowledge).. The Sruti._~'i 1l ~ ~ ~ '8ls'&1li'1lltf~ '" (1qql~:' 3q4f%ffi I (. 3-8). J '60\5. 'GT • ~ . one-pointed buddbi (Ka..:II"":' ~ ftl:S:. -it has to be concluded that the Vedic intuition and contemplation alone.ro-11. afC::Cf)It. Fi1:g:. F. As for evidential text cited by the opponent. ~ I afc. these words should be taken in the Vedic sense of 'the potential seed of the Universe dependent on Paramatman (avyakrta)' and the discipline of adhyiitma-yoga (Ka.. Vedic contemplation on Atman is more likely to strike the mind of a Vedic student than the 'Dhyana' leading to Samadhi (trance) as taught by Patanjali. .F'Hq8Jur 4lqql~ol ~ ~ CiIFlfd I ~ err R:...f t1lg:.ro-I' II '6 o~ . is thus clarified by Sankara :cnr G~f~IJ'fu'l'd0hl{uj fll:S'&lli'Pllf~1 . .~ .YOGA 99 and against confounding any resemblance of Sarnkhya teaching in certain texts where texts teach Brahman as a matter of fact (from Siltra VS. 6-13).&141ll!i'I'<I~ !'Iftll(1~: . however. l-I-5 to 1~4-27) and in the concluding Surra 1-4-28. G-~~) ~ II Uff. [The word Sarnkhya as referring to Vedic intuition is more naturally to be expected to have been referred to.~.~f<OlC(lIOf1Cljtt_ ~.. What actually is meant by the words S§qJkhya and Yoga_. (Sve.. 3-12). are denoted by the words SiiIpkhya and Yoga."t . for Samkhya and Yoga have earned world-wide fame as the means for attaining the highest goal of human life and are accepted by those versed in Sastra. ~-t) ~ iftRt w ~ fll:S:.. when the Sruti uses words like 'evyskts' (unmanifest . are all dualists. '" F._&1"11ll~('ljr{C( q{l1q{it:(I*rr~ '" I tll&@l{pTI '" fu ~ m \1CthI{oj ~ I '.I("~Cfl('ClfCl~HI<l~:. independent of the Veda. all other systems including the Yoga of Patanjali. one is freed from all the bandages".Ka.. can the Highest Good be attained. and they have also the implied support of the Sruti 'Knowing that Cause attained through Samkhya and Yoga. Their refutation. (Sve. attempt has been made here to refute the Samkhya and Yoga Smrtis alone. is attempted here..~ ..'.l "" "B. 3-11).:tl~!i':q qF{llt::lcft.g:. "Even while there are many SI1J..~H: ..w fqffit~ "k~Cfi(qt.l§!'l~I~'"1~t. as is well-known rejects all other sources as means to the Highest Good except the intuition of the One absolute Alman. 2-1-3. may be deemed to have been discarded.. he says that with the lengthy refutation of the Samkhya.f ~ '81.] "BTtR loiter I fClFC::('ClISfd~"3>~fd : ~ (-~. for these are the more proximate references. because neither through the knowledge of Samkhya nor through the Naturally then.~ 0.

is to be found in Badarayana's Sutras 'an~ 1Ol1l1'JHI~ (VS. And that intellect in its turn. should be finally settled in Santa .~ of the Yoga 31Tfl1if...) as greater than the "I:fI "1[~ O[ ~ 3iClfd ~d 1:Rlsfi:r 3il{4111icrr fCl~ 1IFr. and has nothing to do with the suppression of the modifications of the mind (F-i:t"ct'ifuf.3-11) has the serious import of emphasizing each one of the successive links (such as the Manas.JCh04lf~ ~ I FqCfl01~41::~f~'1 ~1'1~I~fG:ctllli ~ 3ik"1f1 ~ 31't4qBlll{"q~ ~ 'dP1f1:t ~ ..l-4-1." SBh.~.:p. ~~\. 31Tfl1if. the final Goal. is only the practice 6I1:g:. Pill=t:0t't I ~ ~ tr_lt+ldIQI&Tt'1 "IT a:rrmR ~ 31Tfl1if. one should withdraw whenever he observes a tendency on its part to incline towards such thinking and should merge it in that which is denoted by the word jniina : that is.Yoga as follows :- a WleH"4 q tt:! q i:. 337. the Supreme Reason. ~. "After having stated how the Highest Abode of Vishnu (or the truth about the Absolute Reality) is hard to know. the first . one should renounce the functions of the organ . The subject for discussion is to decide whether the Sruti (Ka. in connection with Adhyatma. The word 'dhyiina' which some are likely to take for Upasana in all contexts. in the intellect or the faculty of detennination.100 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT sANKARA ADHYATMA .l II qn. the experiencing self.~l. one should merge in 'Mshst-Atmeri'.:lu't:1) taught by Patanjali. Sankara refers to the word Yoga in his Bhashya (on.1-4-1..YOGA 101 We shall now take up the words 'Yoga' and 'Dhyana' as used by Sruikara and Badarayana.l RCfl(Ulqfd II 4(Wl"( ~ CflIG314i SOIrdG3lq~q_ ~"'if "This is the gist : 'One should restrain speech in the mind'. 2-1-3).'"FIf11~1#lf(1ii. and finally intuiting one's eternal identity with the Absolute Atman. 3-3-14) which undertakes to appraise the teaching of the Katha text (Ka. 337. or it may be. which is to be refuted later on (in VS. This 'Great Atman'. the Buddhi & c. 11) dealing with the series of more amd more subtle entities culminating in Purusha (Atman). that is. Sankara explains the process in these words :- t«IS4i dct"j1i4 oqqfd I ~ l:Rft:r {iQ'P0i\. is as of speech and the other external senses.born Buddhi (of Hiranyagarbha) by rendering it more subtle.. 3-10.l11 itself.:ri# Cl d EJ:c0 il01 :(1. <>.Atman (the Atman devoid of all multiplicity) who is being taught in the present context.ij~i'1 f. ~-){-~." SBh. 1ITri ~!i'fllf(1 II sn. The description follows :~ ~ 1"'1 "11 rqf..:l . It is obvious that this Yoga.fq step 1"16'i15Cf6'il1d~ep Iq Id 'U. and should rest identifying oneself with the mind And noting the evil effect of thinking on external objects. he explains Yoga as the means of intuiting It. I qlll!fG~I~Rlli5Lllq\{l{ of retreating from and retracting one~ natural s tendency of extrovertness.9. 1-4-9).

that it is an instance of concentrated attitude of Buddhi for the purpose of visioning Atman : '~ 'He is seen by one-pointed buddhi by those who are habituated to look at subtle entities' (Ka. rn.. Sankara explains rayana as meaning to assert that Purusha alone meant to be emphasized as the most supreme in the series and interprets the word Adhyana 3ITUlHQcfChI4 e-. We may now pass on to consider the nature and function of sravfl{1a. 3-3-14.102 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA THE IMMEDIATE MEANS TO KNOWLEDGE 103 immediately preceding one. 341. IMMEDIATE MEANS KNOWLEDGE TO It will be noted that Badarayana according to Sankara.Yoga taught in the Bhagavadagita .f~ ~ ~ I t~ 4)11~mlrB( ~ So we may be sure that it is a clear instance of misconception to suppose that this Yoga is a kind of Upasana. Their real aim is to tum the seeker back from the natural tendency to go outwards towards the external objects on the part of the aggregate of the body and the senses. for ~l.~) SBh. 4. 6-29) the same Atman in all creatures and those creatures in that Attnan j-w. ~-~-~¥. 3-12) 66. THE 'The word ~Adhy5naya' in the Siitra means for the sake of right knowledge . . '(141{i!{f. 52. e-. sn.. contemplation is taught here as a means for right vision and not in and for its own sake.Yoga to suspect that it may be a kind of Upasana or meditation (exercise of some mental volition) .. ~-~~)- 3fTU1H~qf~~qd. The same is the case with the Dhyana. implying injunction are only seemingly such.FF"l1~ ~ ~~<q: I' {"<fiT. for the Sruti itself says in so many words. sees (G. 1-1-4. manana and nididhyiisana taught as means to Darssn« or Vision of Atman by Yajiiavalkya to his spouse Maitreyi as found in the· Brhadaranyaka Upanishad.. ~-~-¥. f{Bi!O~r'1: II' fu ~ II em.g 31TUlI'"IGq ~QRq_ "U. While there has been a notable conflict between two sub-commentaries of Sankara regarding this matter. ~¥~. {:IUPG~f·ilq "WId: I ~ Badais here entity thus : there also we find that one who is engaged continuously in dhyana. 3-12) and then sets forth the details of the process.' SBh. and to urge one to set up a stream of thoughts towards the Atman within. (fen~€0t4IfOf cl'i:Hlf"1). "1 -. Sankara himself has expressly proclaimed that the text containing participles. There is really little or no doubt about the Adhyatma. We need to digress here to discuss the vexed question of whether or not these have been enjoined. for. ADHYATMA-YOGA IS NO UPASANA 65. .04 ~"IrfqCflCfl14<ti<Oltl>S:_ ql~S4ir*pn:q{!ii_ rCl5€f1'ft(l I'IflIjlk4t>Tl dWQI MCHf4Ri I' or. and not as an injunction of some Upasana. refers here to Adhyatma.Yoga itself as a means to direct intuition.8Cfi3{i~1~qlf.

literally taken. could of course mean that Samadhi is necessary for the Vedantic knowledge of Alman.-\o. he should be a muai.. and assure himself. m.. 'Therefore a Brahmana should try to stay in boyhood after having exhausted learning (panditya) and having exhausted boyhood and learning..9-~).tanjali is also recommended here by Badarayana according to Sankara. biilya. if that be necessary at all.2-339). In this exerpt..:t{41. contains Yajfiavalkya's recommendation of sravana.CL!: ~lqq?lct II fqF"1~lfBdoq:' ern. f'iM ('1. as a cursory reading of Sankara's Bhashya on VS. and mauna taught in another text with sravana etc. That text in full reads as follows: ~ ~: ':q because there would be no samadhi (if the individual self were not an agent' . ? 67.I (.104 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA IS COMBINED ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY ? 105 But.VS. ' And (~: ARE PANDITYA AND OTHER MEANS THE SAME AS SRAVA~A ETC. ~-t..:s~tt. t141f'tl{iqf~ti1 ~. One more misconception about Sravana and . The wording of the Siltra is '"fI11TV1~lql'6il' GT.. then. ~-~-~~.oj ':q "4T. The reader may look at the commentary on the text itself.-~). manana and nididhyasana as the means for the vision of Atman.:slZltlf4I. he would be a (real) Brahmana. IS A COMBINED PRACTICE OF ALL THE THREE MEANS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY ? . and having exhausted Mauna (contemplation) and non-mauna. there is another Surra in Sankara's Bhashya thereon.~ . that the context is quite different from the one in which Yaiiavalkya's exhortation to his wife occurs. ~ l-\. ~ .)..I '~ err aft ~: "B ~ ~-~-~) iHlo4l t. 68. which uses the word 'Ssmiidhi' which has misled some to succumb to the view that a compromise with the Yoga system of Pa. The Sutra. The very first of the texts quoted here. $c=llciH&lUT:. there is the unequivocal statement of Sankara that all these texts recommend samfidhi (contemplation) needed for intuiting the Atman taught by the Upanishads. with the steps of Patanjala-Yoga.=f .4"'f: sn. 3-5-1. 'a:fIr~(ijci ~ ~. 3-4-47 would make it clear.sfli ~ <St1~'1 -:q fdl'dl:flq_ €I1e:!'~: I~ II -:q qffUSfli fOifC4 EII~ ~f..:. 'flWt~ a:t1{"14Hq_' ( ~.lr4 !>lfd4ff1!>1ltl\1l'i: qlfU. ClGI~ t:t ~--g- . On the face of it the text refers to one who has already known Brahman and has nothing to do with sravana and other means.:s Qp:p{jqF"i tlt.. As impermissible as this equation of sravana etc. We have no inkling anywhere of the eight steps of Patanjala-Yoga in this or in any one of the texts cited here. 'm. But Sankara's commentary leaves no doubt as to what is actually meant :m.~ ~ ). is the identification of Panditya.' Br.

Are all the three means of knowledge beginning with sravana. obligatory for all seekers of jfiana ? Two sub-commentaries answer the question in the affirmative. ){-~-~.' This glossator.itl~Cl iHqtlf. sn. But as to which of these three is the principal and immediate means. who supposed that the injunction of manana and nididhyasana implies that sravana alone is unable to produce jfiana. be taken to mean '~~ ~~' (having listened to.106 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA SANKA. knowledge of Atman. differs from both of these views and unambiguously declares as follows : (~) lOFI""IR~t. and carefully concentrating upon it for a moment.] . This is made crystal-clear elsewhere by him :(~) ~ Any reader who has even an elementary knowledge of Sanskrit. Sankara.:II"":' Q""lR q oll4m""li <iliifl'1fi~llIrctq4. ~o~. there is a dissension between the two schools.. ventures to interpret even this express statement to mean - fl~sm~~rd tif4lI{IQ_ ~~: II ~ ~ &:10lqq~ qf. ~~~. of course. 107 we shall close this topic. however. according to both of these interpreters.qi71PJ11T: "tRf~rqtFl: ~f11C1Ri fI'fSmlO{CI di:dilOlfBCI!Cflll~'qfqgrJOlfd ~ II _ ~. nididhyasana being most necessary according to one subcommentator while sravana is the only means to which the other two are subservient. by any stretch of imagination. SANKARA'S VERDICT AS REGARDS THE MEANS OF KNOWLEDGE 69. sn. "GT. and so he implies that they are needed for th~se who are unable to attain jfiana by the single means of sravana.ql<rq $jICiOICl~cjllfll~ I Yet the sub-commentator who is biased in favour of nididhyiisana (or meditation) as the immediate indispensable means. page 58) and needs no comment. can see for himself that 'fl1iS. [This sentence has been already cited once (in para 48. according to another. The reader will do well to ponder over the meaning of this verdict of that Acharya and to remind himself of Sankara's final conclusion in the matter. All the three are necessary for attaining jfiana.. ~ '5ffu ~ 311~fl{I'i~ tr. whenever he is confronted with any conflict of views on the part of Sankarites ~ . This is in reply to a contemporary commentator on the Siltras. SaiLkara says that both the subsequent recommendations of means are only for direct intuition just like sravana. believes in continued practice of nididhyasana. without reproducing one compact statement of Sankara. reflected upon./d::IICf41~'rl' (having intuited the Entity taught in the proposition 'That thou art' only once) cannot.m$ffir.. We should not close this section dealing with the consideration of the means to the knowledge of Brahman and Final Release.. as absolutely necessary before the dawn of what he calls the Siik§hlitkar8 (realization) of Atman.4IfH.RA'S VERDICT AS REGARDS .

or not combined with Vidya.!ICflRUII{raj II ll"c.. ~ ~ i4&:t1N 114~r(1<qo:tlCf)l{oTI q I~Sf<ct&i~%tlMt. We have so far taken a rapid survey of the most important topics of the SarIraka-MImarp_sa of Badadiya~ according to Sankara regarding which there are likely to be. not only among the followers of adverse schools." SBh. m~11l4Cf1I{U!cei tlf(1qV1=l1~ il&1fCl§41 W l(Cf1Cf114 \icH'11fd ~ "Therefore. and (2) to the Vedantic devices adopted in the Upanishads for the purpose of teaching the nature of the Absolute Reality. but also among those that owe their allegiance to Sankara's tradition itself. owe their origin to interpretations ignoring these points which Sankara has made a sustained effort to stress in his exposition of Badarayana' s work. F 'g-~-~l. ~~\s.on «! *'. this is the final conclusion : Obligatory Karma such as Agnihoatra whether combined with Vidya (meditation).'qf. practised either in this or a previous birth.:l~ " "GT~ tllfI "1'11 ~¥I. and as a matter of fact. 2. 3.108 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA CONCLUSION 109 or with adverse critics owing allegiance schools. with a view to reach the goal of release. standpoint on the one hand. and through indirectly co-operating with the proximate aids such as sravana.. becomes in proportion to its efficacy. Manana. has been mainly responsible for the great many misconceptions about Sankara's line of reasoning. ~qOlq"'l+31o&ldlC{P"if€l·fHs. Be careful to accept any translation only after convincing yourself about its truth in all respects. by anyone longing for release before the dawn of knowledge. Remember CONCLUSION 70. and then you begin to realize it as the one dispensation of the Highest truth.. 4-1-18. Before bringing this work to a close we would advise the earnest student of Sankara's teachings carefully to observe the following Rules during the course of study :1.Y{Uj. FCltlIfClE>14 o~ ~ "1. not attaching the needful importance (1) to the distinction of the empirical standpoint and the transcendental . which do not lend themselves to be expounded in the language of empirical life. twisted and distorted by the several professedly 'followers' of the Acharya himself or just because it happens to be the most maligned by hyper-critics who have not digested the train of argument followed here. Apply the Basic Rules of interpretation.:q I '"d'< -:q j "tfI1P. 537. The disregard of the most important distinction between the principles of approach to be adopted in the study of the previous Mimamsa of Jaimini.. These differences of opinion are. Read the original for yourself as far as possible.:o. and those to be borne in mind by the students of Vedanta-Mhnarnsa of Badarayana. Not a few of the misconceptions pointed out in these paragraphs. due mostly to.nJJT . Do not allow yourself to be bewildered or to become desperate merely because this system happens to be the most misunderstood. faith and intent devotion culminates in bringing about the one effect namely Brahma-Vidya leading to release. the cause of the destruction of accummulated sins which obstruct the knowledge of Brahman." ~ ~ lIlQI B llit"lf mrr. iii l. there have arisen divergent views. ~ fClflltiS:ffi ~ to other 3ifY~l51lf~.

ajfiana 37-49. . Have an experimental faith. avidya .INDEX (N. 'SlLlIOI~~fI4r. avyakrtanamarUpa 29-37. 4. aswapnam 5-6.Sanskrit Words which are used in ~ SlTili:O~Ict. anadi 39-52. There will be no self-contradiction. The teacher is never tired of repeating the most important teachings in different words. and pray for guidance "~"~~ H'fEJ. annamayakosa 24-29.(~r*1(i:. Page 6 ) 3i\JIIft:tCjJ~. 28-35._ fi J( : C 31 F"i. . apavada 51-72.4::r<:t' (G. "1 amrm ~ &j I 3j'1li4<!fl)~!: aroq.m-~ li~\JqIClQ1'tllaa. 8. Thus 5-6 Para 5 . anubhava 55-81. Remember that according to the Upanishads Reality is your inmost Self.. 9. 7.~ t1 "l 'f1 t1 "1! 'H::\Q 31~: ~ ~: a:ruT: '" ajativada 5-5. '. arundhati 24-29. '~Srq.K. ~ 1~"'11 «I. '~ Fq<fli?4I~:'. 22-26. y. adhyasa 7-7. The nearer you come to intuit the Truth of Advaita. 5.f!' WORD . The first number here refers to the Paragraph while the second number refers to the Page of the book. avyakrta 29-36. ~ ~ ~: ~rcfElJ"IFlf) : 31 tFi5:.4\'1 'ill! "l ~ 31~(HICfi<OI"l 31«~14qIG: 31't2lIUqlqqlG: . 6. . assimilates and transcends all genuine truths of Dvaitic Systems. Remember that the truth of Sankara's Advaita is never established by any logical refutation of one or more Dvaitic Systems.sakti 8-8. 54-78. avidya 7-7. the more will you be convinced that Sankara's teaching comprehends.110 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA that Sankara always para-phrases any idea that looks odd at first sight and harmonizes it with intuition. advaita 18-19. Prove everything by direct universal intuition and by reasoning based on such intuition as far as possible. ahankara 8-8. B.J: li~'*I'iefih SPilo'*ffllW'1ffi'. 64-99. avachhinnavada 44-61. aIJU 40-54. 28-35. 10-10. anirvachaniyam 9-9 . Remember that neither quotations nor dry logic without the support of Intuition. 4-2). anubhavanusaritarkah 55-8 I. ani dram 5-6. asatkaryavada 22-27. adhyaropap avada 23-27. adhyardpa 35-47. 27-33. 'Let Sankara interpret Sankara'. 37-49.h' the book and italicised are given in this Index. if you constantly remember the distinction of the two stand-points-Empirical and Transcendental. 28-34. can establish the truth of contradictory doctrines from the transcendental stand-point nor of any empirical fact without any pramana (means of valid knowledge). advaita-prakarana 18-20. 10.

ZfRl\ ~SS1:: ~'tf: ~ 'J:<ti"tlClcllC. 57-85.-3 nyayaprasthana 39-52. darsana 7-8. nanajlvavada nididhyasana 17-18. prasthanatrayi INTR. adhyatma-yoga 20-22. maya 29-36. 66-103. tat tu samanvayat 66-103. "1161"5 m: ~11iflI0:g : ~ ~1"I'h4'«li 'ciPF~I~: ~ ~: " ct4. 11-11. ~ ~: pratipatti 17-18. 68-107. 46-63. Panchapadika 8-8.112 ~ MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SAI'JKARA q~qtfC::q)1 WORD-INDEX 113 3lUJ Irq <{lll 3i1~q. chatushkoti . buddhi 64-99. panditya fiIT'ElBI'll1lftl q){0~ "i. jrvas 22-26. 21-26. Isvara 40-54.:1lqIG: 58-91. ~SS1:: paramarthic 14-14. "Rt!I~: Paramesvara 10-11. ~ paramarthadrsti 10-10. tat-padartha 48-64. prar.. lIrnf4fkl6l!G:: pratibimbavada 30-40. jivanmukti 51-71. tvam-padlirtha 48-64. avyakta 64-99.. 46-63. manana 1W11l. upadhi 17-18. mugdha state '" ftrDmi:rr 43-59. prakrti ~: prarabdha 16-17. jiiana 45-62. atmaikatva 44-61. lW1I 9-9. karaka 43-59. 44-61.. prajfia "RTOlT: 57-88. balya ~ INTR.~. ekatva 40-53. pramanas 9-9. ~ \jq1011f1 7-7. 17-18) 66-103. jiianakarmasamuchchayavada 64-101. gaunatman 5-5. 57-88. 48-66. ~: &:jq~lHl'''I paramartha and vyavahara 57-87. jiHinakanda 54-77. ekajlva-vada 54-77. rnayavada m: . mi thyajnnanam ftf~ 37-48.-3. mukhyasamanadhikaranya 48-64.r: 41-56. jiiapaka 60-92.tas tnmfllIf_ 67-105. dharma 64-97. tat-tvam-asi 55-82.~pFt: ~d: ~ ~ mt-(ql{_. 11. 39-52. mithya -z::r. tarkasamaya 48-64. "I1J. 29-37. abhasavada 50-69. 48-66.U4IB'"ll{_ 64~99.:: ~ 1ft 0il c=q I "itm: ~ 'ild!Xh"'ifc:: ~ .. LjltlIB('fI14ql~: 10-10. adhyana 10-10. ~ 37-49. mithyatman !i@lit!! lll1!ftl <fi (0<Ol It. badhasamanadhikaranya 48-64. f. akasa 64-102.am:r €4"4'41({_ 'tflf: ~ ~ ~: "IHliiflqc oc::: f<1fc. manas ~: 42-58. prarneyas ~: 47-63. Panchapadikaprasthana 8-8. janmadi 31-42. ~: 67-105. 11-11.\ ~: ~: 3fl'l. naisargika 40-53.-2. dhyana INTR. 31-41. mayasatkaryavada 29-37. ~~ parinama 'tfftuIril : 21-25.

1a-Brahman Avasthatraya of the Unique Method of Vedanta The first publication on the Method of the three states of Consciousness.. Pages: 16 The Vision of Atman The book deals with the following topics: 1.f ~ JI[%<:fl&(q~!(: c{uCflRI: ~: ~ fC:?fl ill! C4 ~ ftt~~~f1fi: 1(.-2 INTR. Nididhyasana. 66-104. Nididhyasana as the continued practice of Sravana and Manana . The Atman to be seen. This treatise contains a brief account of the History of Vedantic thought up to the time of Sarvajiiatma Mum. 9-10.tman of Advaita Vedanta.18. 36-48. 4. 5. 67-105. Upasana and YOga. INTR. Pages: 220 m~: w:nf'Q: ~ q ·'::PHttl{_ ~: sakshatkara samadhi samanvaya-sUtra sama Samkhya and Yoga The Science of Being This work deals with the sixth chapter of the Chhandogya Upanishad and presents in a nutshell the true nature of the 'Science of Being'. dream and deep sleep . 31-42. Pages: 167 Shuddha SaIikara Prakriya Bhaskara (in I. fclf~: fClFr:tfGql ~I:S CfI{ftt~Zi: .-3. 6. waking. 4-5. 61-93.114 MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT SANKARA 64-101. 17. Refutation and Reason. Relative importance of the three means. 67-105. 62-95. Are Sravana and other means enjoined ? 7. 18-19. 45-62.which our Real Self transcends. 2. 17-18. II and III Parts) It sheds light on the Vedantic Method according to Sankara. 64-98. 55-80.ya Sravana Sruti smrti prasthana sadhanam siddhanta Sutra-Bhashya sambandha-vartika sagut.-1. 26-32. 26-32. INTR. Pages : 124 "' ~ . 64-97. 14-13.-2 INTR. determining the real doctrine of the Upanishads in consonance with the 'traditional methodology of teaching. to wit. 3. 15-15. 15-16. Manana further explained. 62-94.-2 4-5.. Pages: 120 Essays on Vedanta This is a companion volume to 'How to Recognize the Method of Vedanta' and an ardent student will be immensely benefited if he understands the basic tenets and the traditional methodology of teaching the Ultimate Non-dual Reality of Brahman or A. A valuable introduction to the study of Vedanta as the Science of Reality. 6-6. INTR. 10-11. How to Recognize the Method of Vedanta The first substantial attempt to reduce all the seemingly various methods of the Upanishads to the only comprehensive one of Superimposition and Rescission. It is found to be a source of enlightenment to all seekers of Truth. 16-17. 68-107.-2. 21-25.66-103. Pages: 120 ~: ~uwfT. INTR. 26-31. EIf~ '{ !H·:qH m~ ~: ~~ ~ {11UI~&l mahat-Atman mauna mum yajfia yoga and dhyana rahasyam laukika-vyavahara vrttikaras vyavahara Vedic vyavahara videhamukti vidhikanda vividisha Sankara Vijayas Sruti -prasthana S ariraka -mimamsa Sakti Sruti -pramfuJ.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful